Navigating the social dimension of sustainability decision making of mega-projects

Until recently, sustainable development was perceived as essentially an environmental issue, relating to the integration of environmental concerns into economic decision-making. As a result, environmental considerations have been the primary focus of sustainability decision making during the economic development process for major projects, and the assessment and preservation of social and cultural systems has been arguably too limited. The practice of social impact and sustainability assessment is an established and accepted part of project planning, however, these practices are not aimed at delivering sustainability outcomes for social systems, rather they are designed to minimise ‘unsustainability’ and contribute to project approval. Currently, there exists no widely recognised standard approach for assessing social sustainability and accounting for positive externalities of existing social systems in project decision making. As a result, very different approaches are applied around the world, and even by the same organisations from one project to another. This situation is an impediment not only to generating a shared understanding of the social implications as related to major projects, but more importantly, to identifying common approaches to help improve social sustainability outcomes of proposed activities. This paper discusses the social dimension of sustainability decision making of mega-projects, and argues that to improve accountability and transparency of project outcomes it is important to understand the characteristics that make some communities more vulnerable than others to mega-project development. This paper highlights issues with current operational level approaches to social sustainability assessment at the project level, and asserts that the starting point for project planning and sustainability decision making of mega-projects needs to include the preservation, maintenance, and enhancement of existing social and cultural systems. It draws attention to the need for a scoping mechanism to systematically assess community vulnerability (or sensitivity) to major infrastructure development during the feasibility and planning stages of a project.

Reconceptualising mega project success in Australian Defence : recognising the importance of value co-creation

Recent literature in project management has urged a re-conceptualisation of projects as a value co-creation process. Contrary to the traditional output-focused project methodology, the value creation perspective argues for the importance of creating new knowledge, processes, and systems for suppliers and customers. Stakeholder involvement is important in this new perspective, as the balancing of competing needs of stakeholders in mega projects becomes a major challenge in managing the value co-creation process. In this study we present interview data from three Australian defence mega projects to demonstrate that senior executives have a more complex understanding of project success than traditional iron triangle measures. In these mega defence projects, customers and other stakeholders actively engage in the value creation process, and over time both content and process value are created to increase defence and national capability. Value created and captured during and post projects are the key to true success.

Rating defense mega-project success : the role of personal attributes and stakeholder relationships

In this paper, we develop and test a model of the relationships between mega-project leaders’ personal attributes and their ratings of project success in the context of the Australian defense industry. In our model, emotional intelligence, cognitive flexibility, and systemic thinking were hypothesized to be related to project success ratings, mediated by internal and external stakeholder relationships. We tested the model in an online survey study of 373 mega-project leaders. Results were that emotional intelligence and cognitive flexibility were found to be related to the quality of mega-project leader’s relationships with both internal and external stakeholders; and that these relationships in turn were found to be associated with the project leaders’ ratings of project success. We found however that systemic thinking had no relationship with either stakeholder relationships or ratings of project success. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings and make recommendations for future research. In particular, additional research is needed to examine the contribution of a wider range of competencies on stakeholder relationships and project success in mega-projects, and that there is also a need for research in future to attempt to use more objective ratings of project success.

Defining mega project success in Australian defence : a relation-based framework for value co-creation with project stakeholders

Defining success in mega projects has been a challenging exercise for Australian Defence. The inherent conflict between nation capability building and cost efficiency raises questions about how to appropriately define mega project success. Contrary to the traditional output-focused project methodology, the value creation perspective argues for the importance of creating new knowledge, processes, and systems for suppliers and customers. Stakeholder involvement is important in this new perspective, as the balancing of competing needs of stakeholders in mega projects becomes a major challenge in managing the value co-creation process. In our earlier study reported interview data from three Australian defence mega projects and reported that those senior executives have a more complex understanding of project success than traditional iron triangle measures. In these mega defence projects, customers and other stakeholders actively engage in the value creation process, and over time both content and process value are created to increase defence and national capability. Value created and captured during and post projects are the key to true success. We aim to develop a comprehensive theoretical model the capture the value co-creation process as a way of re-conceptualising success in mega projects. We propose a new framework redefine project value as multi-dimensional, contextual and temporal construct that emerges from the interactions among multiple stake holders over the complete project life cycle. The framework distinguishes between exploitation and exploration types of projects, and takes into consideration the requisite governance structures.

Megaprojects, Affected communities and sustainability decision making

Increasing scrutiny from the wider community is contributing to a shift towards the delivery and operation of major projects that meets and maintains the sustainability priorities of the community. This is especially significant for large economic projects which have a global track record of social benefit shortfalls, cost overruns, and underestimation of risks. Major industrial and infrastructure projects that cost more than US$1 billion are typically called mega-projects. Globally, investment in mega-projects has exceeded $10 trillion in the last ten years. With so many projects in the pipeline -and many taking place in emerging economies – the effectiveness of the sustainability decision making process is particularly important. The purpose of this paper is to examine how the existing sustainability decision making processes and strategies address the potential challenges facing communities affected by mega-projects. It highlights issues with current operational level approaches to social sustainability assessment at the project level, and argues that to improve accountability and transparency of project outcomes, positive externalities that flow from goods and services provided by the social and cultural systems of the community must be incorporated into decision making.

Economic development and construction productivity in Malaysia

The productivity of the construction industry has a significant effect on national economic growth. Gains from higher construction productivity flow through the economy, as all industries rely on construction to some extent as part of their business investment. Contractions and expansions of economic activity are common phenomena in an economy. Three construction cycles occurred between the years 1970 and 2011 in Malaysia. The relationships between construction productivity and economic development are examined by the partial correlation method to establish the underlying factors driving the change in construction productivity. Construction productivity is statistically significantly correlated with gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in a positive direction for the 1985–98 and 1998–2009 cycles, but not the 1970–85 cycle. Fluctuations in construction activities and the influx of foreign workers underlie the changes of construction productivity in the 1985–98 cycle. There was less fluctuation in construction activities in the 1998–2009 cycle, with changes being mainly due to the fiscal stimulation policies of the government in attempting to stabilize the economy. The intensive construction of mega-projects resulted in resource constraints and cost pressures during the 1980s and 1990s. A better management of the ‘boom-bust’ nature of the construction business cycle is required to maintain the capability and capacity of the industry.

Is it the economy, stupid? The role of social versus economic factors in people’s support for hosting the Olympic Games: Evidence from 12 democratic countries

Public referenda have gained momentum as a democratic tool to legitimize public mega projects such as hosting the Olympic Games. Interest groups in favour of hosting the Olympics therefore try to influence voters through public campaigns that primarily focus on economic benefits. However, recent studies find no or hardly any economic impact of hosting the Olympics, instead providing evidence for a positive social impact. This raises the question whether citizens consider economic or social factors when deciding on hosting the Olympics. Based on representative survey data from 12 countries, our results suggest that economic factors can influence voting behaviour, although the influence of social factors is stronger.

Knowledge Sharing within IT Projects

Even though today’s corporations recognize that they need to understand modern project management techniques (Schwalbe, 2002, p2), many researchers continue to provide evidence of poor IT project success. With Kotnour, (2000) finding that project performance is positively associated with project knowledge, a better understanding of how to effectively manage knowledge in IT projects should have considerable practical significance for increasing the chances of project success. Using a combined qualitative/quantitative method of data collection in multiple case studies spanning four continents, and comprising a variety of organizational types, the focus of this current research centered on the question of why individuals working within IT project teams might be motivated towards, or inhibited from, sharing their knowledge and experience in their activities, procedures, and processes. The research concluded with the development of a new theoretical model of knowledge sharing behavior, ‘The Alignment Model of Motivational Focus’. This model suggests that an individual’s propensity to share knowledge and experience is a function of perceived personal benefits and costs associated with the activity, balanced against the individual’s alignment to a group of ‘institutional’ factors. These factors are identified as alignments to the project team, to the organization, and dependent on the circumstances, to either the professional discipline or community of practice, to which the individual belongs.

Identifying the knowledge management structures in enterprise systems projects

Enterprise System (ES) implementation and management are knowledge intensive tasks that inevitably draw upon the experience of a wide range of people with diverse knowledge capabilities. Knowledge Management (KM) has been identified as a critical success factor in ES projects. Despite the recognized importance of managing knowledge for ES benefits realization, systematic attempts to conceptualize KM-structures have been few. Where the adequacy of KM-structures is assessed, the process and measures are typically idiosyncratic and lack credibility. Using the ‘KM-process’, itself based in sociology of knowledge, this paper conceptualizes four main constructs to measure the adequacy of KM-structures. The SEM model is tested using 310 responses gathered from 27 ES installations that had implemented SAP R/3. The findings reveal six constructs for KM-structure. Furthermore, the paper demonstrates the application of KM-structures in the context of ES using the Adaptive Structuration Theory. The results demonstrate that having adequate KM-structures in place, while necessary, is not sufficient. These rules and resources must be appropriated to have greater positive influence on the Enterprise System. Furthermore, the study provides empirical support for knowledge-based theory by illustrating the importance of knowledge use/re-use (vs. knowledge creation) as the most important driver in the process of KM.