Mulholland, C; Chan, P W; Canning, K and Ejohwomu, O A (2020) Social value for whom, by whom and when? Managing stakeholder dynamics in a UK megaproject. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 173(2), pp. 75-86. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
Studies of project success have generally recognised the role that stakeholder management plays in shaping a collective understanding of value. While these studies have typically focused on new builds, few studies have examined stakeholder management at the end of the life of a built asset. This paper draws on a single megaproject case study into social value in nuclear decommissioning and remediation to examine how 'success' or 'failure' in projects is framed and the implications of stakeholder management in shaping these notions of performance. By tracing the historical development of Dounreay, UK, an experimental nuclear energy site at an advanced stage of decommissioning, it was found that key stakeholders change over time, as those most affected by the changing dynamics of the megaprojects come and go, with resulting impacts on the ways that conditions for success are framed and social value is defined. The authors' findings stress the importance of taking a pluralistic and processual view of stakeholders and demonstrate the need for policymakers, practitioners and researchers to pay greater attention to fragmentation and integration of stakeholders' interests and influences as they change over time. These dynamics of stakeholder management will in turn challenge preconceived ideas of success that are often framed in the early stages of a project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | infrastructure planning; project management; social impact |
| Index terms: | integration, social impact, dynamics, megaproject, fragmentation, project success, practitioner, project management, infrastructure planning, new build, case study, historical development, built asset, social value, decommissioning, stakeholder management |
| Subjects: | strategic project management, participation process, systems engineering, data collection methods, business, practitioner, architectural and construction history, sociology, asset management, renovation and retrofit, organizational analysis, project management theory and practice, construction integration |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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