Search results

1 – 2 of 2
Article
Publication date: 5 March 2018

Diletta Colette Invernizzi, Giorgio Locatelli and Naomi J. Brookes

The literature lacks a single and universally accepted definition of major and megaprojects: usually, these projects are described as projects with a budget above $1 billion and a…

Abstract

Purpose

The literature lacks a single and universally accepted definition of major and megaprojects: usually, these projects are described as projects with a budget above $1 billion and a high level of innovation, complexity, and uniqueness both in terms of physical infrastructure and stakeholder network. Moreover, they often provide fewer benefits than what were originally expected and are affected by delays and cost overruns. Despite this techno-economic magnitude, it is still extremely hard to gather lessons learned from these projects in a systematic way. The purpose of this paper is to present an innovative methodology based on benchmarking to investigate good and bad practices and learn from a portfolio of unique megaprojects.

Design/methodology/approach

The methodology combines quantitative and qualitative cross-comparison of case studies and statistical analysis into an iterative process.

Findings

Indeed, benchmarking offers significant potential to identify good and bad practices and improve the performance of project selection, planning, and delivery.

Research limitations/implications

The methodology is exemplified in this paper using the case of Nuclear Decommissioning Projects and Programmes (NDPs).

Originality/value

Indeed, due to their characteristics, NDPs can be addressed as megaprojects, and are a relevant example for the application of the methodology presented here that collects and investigates the characteristics that mostly impact the performance of (mega)projects, through a continuous learning process.

Details

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 11 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1753-8378

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 5 March 2018

Maude Brunet and Monique Aubry

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the process of translation of an institutionalized governance framework as adapted to a major project in practice. Although…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the process of translation of an institutionalized governance framework as adapted to a major project in practice. Although infrastructure projects have been studied for decades, most studies have emphasized economic or contingency-based perspectives. Of those studies, some researchers have focused on governance frameworks for public infrastructure projects, and their impact for shaping the front-end phase of those projects. Yet, little is known about the way actors translate and enact those governance frameworks into practice. Understanding this translation process will lead to a better understanding of the overall performance of major infrastructure projects.

Design/methodology/approach

This qualitative research is based on a case study of one public infrastructure project in the health sector in Quebec, Canada. Through non-participant observation and interviews, the planning phase of the project is presented as it unfolds.

Findings

The process of translation is presented, from the ostensive, institutionalized governance framework, to appropriation into performative practices, which resulted in 12 specific practices: four “structuring” practices at the institutional level, five “normalizing” practices at the organizational level and three “facilitating” practices at the project level.

Originality/value

The main contribution of this paper is to enrich our understanding of the governance of major public infrastructure projects with process- and practice-based theories.

Details

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 11 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1753-8378

Keywords

1 – 2 of 2