Hartmann, A (2023) Learning between projects: An accomplishment of social-material practices in projects. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 39th Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2023, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
The one-off nature of projects represents both a source for creating new knowledge and a barrier to continuously improving organisational routines. The temporary configuration of task-dependent resources appears to stimulate learning within projects but limits the dissemination of this learning between projects and the broader organisation. This paradoxical learning potential of projects has attracted much attention in the literature. However, learning from and between projects is still predominantly seen as the inflow and outflow of knowledge possessed by individuals or stored in databases or documents. Such a narrow view of project-based learning neglects the social-material complexity of project practices. In this paper, the argument is put forward that learning between projects is foremost an accomplishment of social-material practices in the context of projects. By adopting a practice theory lens and based on an illustrative case of railway viaduct construction, we will show how cross-project learning trajectories emerge from the social-material practices in projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | project-based learning; learning trajectories; social-material practices |
| Index terms: | organizational routine, configuration, documents, practice theory, complexity, database, project-based learning, dissemination |
| Subjects: | theoretical framing, business, knowledge translation, professional development, systems engineering, data management, learning methods |
| Topics: | Education, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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