Eriksson, T (2015) Developing routines in large inter-organisational projects: A case study of an infrastructure megaproject. Construction Economics and Building, 15(3), pp. 4-18. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
General management research has increasingly recognised the significance of routines in organisational performance. Among organisational tasks, megaprojects depend more on routines selected and created within the project than standard, small-scale projects do, owing largely to their size, duration, and uniqueness. Within this context, the present paper investigates how project routines were established and developed during the early design phase of an inter-organisational megaproject. A case study of a large public infrastructure project was conducted, in which data were collected during observations, semi-structured interviews, and project document studies over the course of three years. Results of analysis revealed that the client exerted the greatest impact on choice of routines and that the temporary nature of tasks limited efforts to fine-tune routines. Changes in routines were primarily reactive to new knowledge concerning project needs. The findings suggest that meta-routines to consciously review routines should be used to a greater extent and designed to capture supplier experiences as well.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | coordination; learning; practice approach; projects; routines |
| Index terms: | routine, organizational performance, public infrastructure, case study, design phase, management research, inter-organizational project, interview, megaproject, coordination, duration |
| Subjects: | research design and methodology, performance measurement, data collection methods, management, organizational theory, sociology, project controls, strategic project management, infrastructure and transport systems, professional practice |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Time Control, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Design Practice |
| 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