Entrepreneurship and project management relationships: So far so good? Dialogic conversation and Luhmannian perspective

Purpose: Both project investments and entrepreneurial ventures are considered powerful catalysts of economic prosperity and social progress. But these ventures and investments come with their inherent challenges and risks. Observing this situation, academics have paid close attention to the fields of entrepreneurship and project management (E&PM). Thus, for over 30 years, the two fields have witnessed remarkable developments among management and organization studies. The historical perspective reveals that these two multidisciplinary fields were built in parallel, on very distinct mindsets and cultures. The purpose of this paper is to offer a wider dialogic conversation between two distinct perspectives and related propositions: E&PM should stay separated; and E&PM should converge. Design/methodology/approach: In order to guide the investigation of these propositions, the authors call for Luhmann and a systemic-discursive perspective of both fields discourses. Ultimately, the purpose is to contribute to the debate surrounding the following questions: are E&PM fields so far from each other, and thus, irreconcilable? And, if so, is it so good? Findings: Finally, the authors will suggest that E&PM may stay far from each other as they do not share similar discourses and codes. This may be a good state of affairs, however, as distance generates a fruitful creative tension between them. Originality/value: While many researchers focus on linking E&PM, arguing that they largely agree as to their underlying goal, the paper aims to offer a wider dialogical conversation between the two distinct perspectives and their related propositions: E&PM should stay separate; and E&PM should converge. In order to do so, this paper calls for a Luhmannian and a systemic-discursive perspective. © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited

Managing tensions and paradoxes between stakeholders in a complex project context: Case study and model proposal

Stakeholder (SH) management has recently undertaken a turn from the traditional management "of" to managing "for" and "with" SH. Relating to this relational trend, identification and management tensions between SH is an important area of study. Indeed, from how to live with and/or resolve or not those tensions depend on the possibility of building the most beneficial cooperation possible between SH for the continuation of the project, to obtain win-win results, and to promote the shared value and common good. For this purpose, a theoretical model is suggested, based on the approaches of paradoxes and conventionalist economy of worth, supporting the identification of tensions between SH and their justifications, and the clarification it helps to bring as to win-win or shared value outcomes, or the absence of such, in the context of a complex project. The suggested model is then used in an exploratory case study. The goal is to assess its relevance, usefulness, and quality. Two theoretical contributions emerge from the data analyzed: 1) several tensions over various categories (allegiance, dimensional, temporal, learning, performance and spatial) can draw on the same justifications (rationale that opposes industrial and domestic conventions); 2) prioritization of tension categories can make it easier to resolve them. © 2016 Editora Mundos Sociais. All rights reserved

Mixed Methods Use in Project Management Research

Mixed methods research is increasingly being used in business and management disciplines, in spite of positivist traditions. The aim of the study is twofold: (1) to examine the types of mixed methods approaches being used, and (2) to determine the quality of the reporting of mixed methods studies published in the field of project management. A retrospective content analysis of articles from three ranked project management journals was undertaken for a sample period of 2004 to 2010. Our findings suggest the field of project management is in need of capacity building in relation to the good reporting of mixed methods studies

Making Projects Real in a Higher Education Context

Challenging educators to rethink projects and see them as a practice rather than as a model of management the authors explore the possibilities for using live projects to enhance real world learning in higher education. Drawing on the work of the ‘critical projects movement’ the chapter outlines a theoretical underpinning for reconceptualising projects as a practice and proposes a new pedagogic model that of ‘agile learning’. Framing the use of live projects is a mode of real world learning that generates encounters with industry professionals and provides real-value outputs for clients. The chapter explores the challenges that face educators who wish to foreground ‘social learning’ and engagement with communities of practice as a means of easing the transition for students from education to the world of work

University–industry collaboration: using meta-rules to overcome barriers to knowledge transfer

This is the final version of the article. Available from Springer Verlag via the DOI in this record.University–industry knowledge transfer is an important source wealth of creation for all partners; however, the practical management of this activity within universities is often hampered by procedural rigidity either through the absence of decision-making protocols to reconcile conflicting priorities or through the inconsistent implementation of existing policies. This is problematic, since it can impede operational effectiveness, prevent inter-organisational knowledge-creation and hamper organisational learning. This paper addresses this issue by adopting a cross-discipline approach and presenting meta-rules as a solution to aid organisational decision making. It is proposed that meta-rules can help resolve tensions arising from conflicting priorities between academics, knowledge transfer offices and industry and help facilitate strategic alignment of processes and policies within and between organisations. This research contributes to the growing debate on the strategic challenges of managing knowledge transfer and presents meta-rules as a practical solution to facilitate strategic alignment of internal and external stakeholder tensions. Meta-rules has previously only been applied in a computer intelligence context however, this research proves the efficacy of meta rules in a university–industry knowledge transfer context. This research also has practical implications for knowledge transfer office managers who can use meta-rules to help overcome resource limitations, conflicting priorities and goals of diverse internal and external stakeholders

Project governance and risk management: From first-order economizing to second-order complexity

© Cambridge University Press 2017. Introduction Until recently, the scholarship of project management has been dominated by a traditional approach reflective of foundational views about how to conduct successful projects (Morris, 2011). This traditional approach assumes a reductionist, positivist stance (Jackson, 2003; O'Leary, 2012), which follows neoclassical economics and the rationalist model of decision-making (Goode, 1997; Simon, 1979), in which analysis and action are cleanly separated in a logical sequence (Koskela & Howell, 2002; Ryle, 1984). Many of the contributions to the emergent project governance literature (Ahola, Ruuska, Artto, & Kujala, 2014) refer back to rational economic theories that theorize the firm as a nexus of contracts (Foss, 1993). Such approaches conceive of governance as a choice of form, which then drives incentives, decision rights, and accountability. In this traditional view, risk management is conceived of as a rational, linear process of identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment (ISO, 2009) within a defined organizational context. However, the burden of calculative rationality (Levinthal & March, 1993) bestowed by the traditional approaches appears to be unbearable in practice (Guo, Chang-Richards, Wilkinson, & Li, 2014; O'Leary, 2012; Ward & Chapman, 2008; Winch & Maytorena, 2011). In this chapter, we argue that a “Third Wave” approach (Morris, Pinto, & Söderlund, 2011) to project governance and risk management is required in order to address issues of process (rather than form) and uncertainty (rather than risk). We begin with a review of how project risk management is shaped by governance. We then examine contemporary theories of risk and uncertainty and discuss their implications for governance. The chapter concludes with implications for practice. Project Governance for Risk Management: The “First-Order Economizing” Logic Two longstanding issues in the management of organizations have been to ensure that managers act in a manner satisfactory to those they are accountable to (Berle & Means, 1991), within efficiency constraints (Knight, 1921; Smith, 1776). A contemporary expression of these issues is as follows: an organization is defined as “a multiagent system with identifiable boundaries and system-level goals toward which the constituent agent's efforts are expected to make a contribution” (Puranam, Alexy, & Reitzig, 2014, p. 166)

Exploring the dynamics of project management office and portfolio management co-evolution: A routine lens

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd, APM and IPMA This paper addresses a recurrent topic of organizational project management (OPM) research: Project Management Offices (PMOs) are perceived to be instrumental in implementing strategy through portfolios of projects, but empirical evidence also shows that PMOs are often short-lived and their value is hard to quantify. We argue that an explanation may lie in the processes of co-evolution that PMOs undergo over time in interaction with organizational capabilities and context. We adopt an innovative research frame in the context of OPM research, using process theories of change and routines as a lens to investigate the co-evolution of PMO and Portfolio Management. A conceptual framework is suggested and we use an empirical case study to test and refine it. We discuss the theoretical implications of the findings and highlight the contributions made in supporting, adding, articulating and contrasting extant literature. We conclude the paper underlining paths for further researches

The getting of wisdom: The future of PM university education in Australia

The dynamic and complex nature of project management (PM) in Australia provides exciting opportunities for universities to that are willing to actively engage with their corporate partners and other key stakeholders to develop program and course offerings that simultaneously address the needs of students, employers, and other stakeholders and further the current body of PM knowledge and research. This article identifies key challenges and opportunities for the future direction of PM university education. This draws on descriptions of successful program models, examining teaching on PM skills on generic business and engineering degrees, dedicated graduate masters programs in PM, doctoral research programs in PM, and forms of effective collaboration between industry and academia