Winch, G M (2015) Project organizing as a problem in information. Construction Management and Economics, 33(2), pp. 106-116. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
One of the most influential perspectives in business and management has been the Carnegie School, represented by such luminaries as James March, Hebert Simon, Oliver Williamson and Zur Shapira. The perspective underpins much of contemporary organization theory and organizational economics. Yet there have only been limited attempts to apply it to the domain of construction economics and management. An important exception to this statement is the application of Williamson’s transaction cost economics to the governance of inter-firm relations in construction, but the opportunity is presently being missed for a more thorough-going application. The aim, therefore, is to suggest what such an application might look like and why it might be useful in stimulating new lines of research enquiry. The principal tenets of the Carnegie School are examined, as well as the central role of uncertainty and bounded rationality in those tenets. The contributions to organization theory of the Carnegie School are drawn upon to conceptualize project organizing as a problem in information, and suggest a new perspective on the microfoundations for that theory.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | carnegie school; microfoundations; organization theory; organizational economics; project organization |
| Index terms: | construction economics, project organization, transaction cost, bounded rationality, organizational economics, governance |
| Subjects: | business, organizational theory, decision-making and reasoning, economics, financial analysis |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Governance, Organizational Design |
| 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