A project contractor can promote the success of a delivery project by planning the project well and following a project management methodology (PMM). However, various…
A project contractor can promote the success of a delivery project by planning the project well and following a project management methodology (PMM). However, various changes typically take place, requiring changes to the project plan and actions that deviate from the firm’s established PMM. The purpose of this paper is to explore different types of changes and change management activities over the lifecycle of delivery projects.
A qualitative single case study design was used. In total, 17 semi-structured interviews were carried out during a delivery project in a medium-sized engineering company that delivers complex systems to industrial customers.
Both plan-related changes and deviations from the PMM were mapped throughout the project lifecycle. Various internal and external sources of change were identified. An illustrative example of the interconnectedness of the changes reveals the potential escalation of changes over the project lifecycle. Managers and project personnel engage in different change management activities and improvisation to create alternative paths, re-plan, catch up, and optimize project performance after changes.
The empirical study is limited to a single case study setting and a single industry. The findings draw attention to the interconnectedness and potential escalation effect of changes over the lifecycle of the project, and the need for integrated change management and improvisation actions.
Efficient change management and improvisation at the early phase of a delivery project can potentially mitigate negative change incidents in later project phases. Changes are not only the project manager’s concern; project personnel’s skilled change responses are also helpful. The findings emphasize the importance of the project customer as a source of changes in delivery projects, meaning that customer relationship management throughout the project lifecycle is needed for successful change management.
The study offers increased understanding of changes and change management throughout the project lifecycle. The results show evidence of plan-related and methodology-related changes and their interconnections, thereby proposing a lifecycle view of integrated change management and improvisation in projects.
Infrastructure projects are expected to deliver value to their stakeholders long after completion. Project value is multi-dimensional and subjective and evolves over the…
Infrastructure projects are expected to deliver value to their stakeholders long after completion. Project value is multi-dimensional and subjective and evolves over the project lifecycle. How stakeholders frame the expected value is central to the public debate about proposed infrastructure projects and influences the financing decisions; however, this framing is inadequately understood. The purpose of this paper is to develop new knowledge for shaping infrastructure projects by identifying the ways in which stakeholders frame project value at the project front end.
Three transport infrastructure projects are compared in a qualitative, document-based study. The authors map the dimensions of value at the project front end and identify stakeholders’ approaches to lifecycle-oriented framing of value.
Financial, social and comparative values are dominant in the project front end. The authors frame value into positive and negative dimensions and identify four themes in the lifecycle-oriented framing of value, including uncertainties, timing of cost and benefit realization, project relations and external sponsorship.
The research is limited through the focus on transport infrastructure projects and project front end only, the selection of cases from a single country and the use of document-based data. The systematic analysis approach has yielded novel analytical frameworks that will be useful for further research.
This study identifies value dimensions that are specific to transport infrastructure projects and proposes a framework to assist stakeholders and project managers to better assess and negotiate value when designing their projects.
Regional and comparative values are revealed as novel aspects of value specific to infrastructure projects. The alternative lifecycle-oriented frames offer a new way to understand and structure the co-creation of value and shape negotiation for investment decisions in the project. A portfolio perspective to investment decision making is proposed.