Search results

Transport megaprojects often struggle to offer social value (SV) that meets local communities' needs. This problem is embedded in how local communities' views are captured and incorporated into SV plans through local community engagement (LCE). By problematising the literature, this article aims to identify LCE issues and their impacts on SV plans at the front-end of transport megaprojects.

The theoretical lens of the study is the practice theory developed by Schatzki (2016, 2005). The authors conceptualised LCE as a practice and conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with UK practitioners. The authors collected data in three steps from three types of practitioners involved in LCE practice and SV planning: project managers, LCE experts and SV experts.

The authors identified 18 LCE issues with thematic analysis and clustered them into five themes. These issues impact LCE with five mechanisms. Findings show that a weak link between LCE and SV plans due to the issues reduces LCE to a tick-box exercise and presents a distorted view of local communities. This reduces SV plans to the bare minimum for project approval instead of offering relevant SV to local communities. Addressing the issues goes beyond changing the approach of project teams to engagement (from instrumental to normative) and requires changing the practices.

For the first time, the study uses practice theory to conceptualise LCE as a practice, following the notion of project as practice. The study problematises the literature to address the under-represented link between LCE and SV plans.

Megaprojects are large-scale and long-term investments. Three pillars of sustainable construction objectives, namely, social, environmental and economic, should be integrated into megaproject risk management to ensure long-term success. A risk assessment method, Risk Assessment Method for Sustainable Construction Objectives in Megaprojects (RAMSCOM), was developed for this purpose.

RAMSCOM was developed based on the latest concepts and identifying relevant and critical sustainability objectives and risks through an extensive literature review. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) were used to determine and quantify the threats regarding the importance of the sustainability objectives. The applicability of RAMSCOM was demonstrated on a real megaproject.

The findings revealed that sustainability risk assessment requires integration of economic, environmental, social objectives and analysis of cross-impacts of risk factors. Visualization of interrelated threats, vulnerabilities and objectives has a potential to support risk mitigation decisions to achieve sustainability goals.

The method has been developed based on the findings from a detailed literature survey on sustainability objectives and risks. RAMSCOM was tested on a single project with the assistance of three experts' views. Findings from the case project cannot be directly generalised for various megaprojects considering the unique nature of megaprojects.

Decision-makers can use RAMSCOM to assess sustainability risks in megaprojects and develop risk management plans for the most vulnerable and important sustainable objectives in a visual and quantified approach to ensure megaproject's sustainability in the long-term.

The theoretical contribution is a novel risk assessment method that integrates all dimensions of sustainability and quantifies the vulnerability of sustainability objectives considering their priorities, interrelations and risks. Sustainability dimensions, objectives and risks used in RAMSCOM can be useful for other researchers aiming to develop similar methods.

Megaprojects are seen as vehicles for delivering significant social value. However, megaproject decision-making, which is deeply embedded in networks comprising formal and informal practices involving the exercise of power, can facilitate or hinder social value delivery. Moreover, these decision-making practices are often intentionally designed and executed to remain hidden and so are not easily identifiable but have implications for maximising social value. This paper aims to identify the hidden barriers to social value delivery on megaprojects resulting from the decision-making environment.

Governmentality theory was used to deconstruct the megaproject decision-making environment. The critical realism philosophy was merged with a narrative inquiry approach to analyse the everyday, taken-for-granted practices that resulted in the decision-making outcomes. Data were collected through 22 in-depth semi-structured interviews to uncover stories highlighting the nature of power relations underpinning the decision-making environment of one megaproject in the Asia Pacific region.

Governmentality theory as a lens showed that emergent, informal governing practices blend with formal governance mechanisms, creating a complex mix of overt and covert power dynamics. The findings suggest that the exercise of covert power by project team members through deviant tactics hinders social value delivery. Therefore, understanding the power dynamics that influence the decision-making of project team members is key for maximising social value delivery.

Originality stems from the use of governmentality theory and critical realism to deconstruct and explain the megaproject decision-making environment, enabling observation of otherwise challenging-to-understand, complex and hidden barriers to the delivery of social value. This paper offers a novel way of explaining social value delivery through megaproject decision-making.

This study investigates the impact of network positions on inter-team conflicts and project success in megaprojects.

Network position is measured with centrality and structural holes. Substantive conflict and affective conflict reflect inter-team conflicts. A questionnaire survey was implemented in Chinese megaprojects, and 309 valid questionnaires were collected. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling and bootstrapping methods.

The results show that centrality negatively impacts project success, while the presence of a team in a structural hole has no significant impact on project success. Centrality is negatively related to substantive conflict and is positively related to affective conflict. The team in a structural hole has a positive effect on substantive conflict and a negative effect on affective conflict. Substantive conflict and affective conflict have positive and negative effects on project success, respectively. The effect of network position on project success is mediated by inter-team conflict.

This research provides a reference for megaproject managers to better conduct network governance, manage inter-team conflict, and successfully manage projects. The study did not investigate the effects of changes in teams' network positions on project success. Future research should explore this facet of megaprojects.

This research adds to existing research on network position, and reveals that project network governance is important for megaproject success. This provides a new direction for megaproject management. Furthermore, the results validate constructive and non-constructive roles and the mediating role of inter-team conflict. This complements the literature on conflict management, providing a reference for megaproject managers when managing inter-team conflict.

This paper aims to present a structured and comprehensive review of relevant works, collected through a systematic methodology and clustered into nine meaningful categories on megaproject management systems and the current requirements for improved industrial megaprojects.

The methodology employed in this paper retrieves relevant works from available online citation indexes that are published in peer-reviewed journals and other reliable sources from 2000 to 2021.

It has been observed that the literature on megaproject management is still premature and requires further research to understand better the main gaps and effects of large-scale and typically complex megaprojects. Significant improvements are needed towards covering gaps to address the project management system holistically over the entire project life cycle. There are no clear guidelines for achieving a complete and conclusive project management system and enhancing future megaprojects' management capabilities.

This paper provides a clear picture of the existing literature on megaproject management systems, contributing insights for successful megaproject projects. Additionally, the holistic analysis identifies gaps in the body of knowledge, revealing avenues for future research.

Uncertainty, a state of unknowing linked to threats and opportunities, is a key characteristic of megaprojects, making it challenging for government officials and politicians to decide on their initiation. For them, implementation by the private sector adds an extra layer of complexity and uncertainty to megaproject planning. In this context, only a few studies have focussed on governing and the mobilization of uncertainty arguments in communication between government actors and private developers either in favour of or against megaprojects. The purpose of this article is to shed light on how private megaproject proposals progress towards political acceptance or rejection in public decision-making.

This process of public decision-making on private megaproject proposals is examined in the case of the Helsinki–Tallinn undersea rail tunnel. In line with the interpretive research tradition, the authors’ study draws on a qualitative methodology underpinned by social constructionism. The research process can be characterized as abductive.

The authors’ findings suggest that while public decision-making on megaprojects is a conflictual and dynamic process, some types of uncertainty are relatively more important in affecting the perceived feasibility of the projects in the eyes of public sector decision-makers.

This study contributes to the debate on uncertainty management in megaprojects, proposing a new type of uncertainty – uncertainty about privateness – which has not been explicitly visible thus far.

Detecting precursory signals is critical to increasing the resilience of megaprojects to crises. This study aims to investigate key crisis precursors to better apprehend traces of megaproject crises and proactively respond to approaching crises, thereby increasing project resilience.

Drawing on the theory of weak signals, 25 potential precursors of megaproject crises are extracted. Using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), four models were tested to identify key crisis precursors based on a questionnaire survey of 168 megaproject participants in China. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to examine the differences in participants’ perceptions of key crisis precursors.

Four key crisis precursors were identified: Imbalance of Benefits and Costs, Irresponsible and Unqualified Key Participants, Regulatory Mechanisms Lacking Transparency and Flexibility, and Information Uncertainty and Asymmetry. Compared with senior executives, team members think that key crisis precursors related to regulatory mechanisms and key participants are more likely to trigger crises, which affects responsive actions toward detected crisis precursors. The findings help identify problems at an early stage and enable timely intervention to mitigate crises.

Detection of key crisis precursors allows for proactive and targeted actions to mitigate crises. Megaproject development is affected by institutional mechanisms. The influence of institutions on the effectiveness of crisis management needs further investigation.

Limited attention has been paid to recognizing precursors of megaproject crises. This study identifies four key crisis precursors by uncovering the interrelationships among potential precursors, which enables rapid adaptation to future crises.

Traditional “hierarchical” and “network-centric management” approaches often associated with the management of well-defined construction projects lack the adaptability to cope with uncertainty, standardised practices and the required conformance to industry standards. The purpose of this paper is to propose an integrative “holonic” methodology for the management of megaprojects in the construction industry, which incorporates both adaptability and conformance to standards, and to illustrate the associated benefits of such a methodology.

A multi-case study comprising three cases delivered in the USA and Australia, namely the Adelaide Desalination Plant (ADP), the Seattle–Tacoma International Airport, and the Olmsted Locks and Dam Replacement project were utilized to demonstrate the key features of the hierarchical, network-centric and holonic approaches to managing megaprojects.

The case studies demonstrate incorporating the holonic approach into the management of complex construction projects results in increased management effectiveness and project success. The proposed “holonic” methodology provides the potential to efficiently manage megaprojects navigating through high degrees of uncertainty.

The adoption of the holonic view by project management (PM) practitioners will help them manage megaprojects that are characterised by greater complexity. Second, the proposed methodology enables the discipline of PM to evolve in alignment with rapidly unfolding global transformation trends.

This paper demonstrates the application of the “holonic” methodology to the domain of the management of construction megaprojects. Such an approach is needed as construction projects become increasingly more complex across the world due to technological, political and social uncertainties, larger scale, changing environmental and safety regulations, and the growing involvement of human factors germane to this research.

This study aims to investigate the relationships between the different strengths of ties (strong ties and weak ties), types of trust and project performance in megaprojects.

A questionnaire survey was conducted with various experts and professionals involved in megaprojects, and 350 valid responses were received. Data was analyzed by means of structural equation modeling.

The results show that both strong ties and weak ties have positive impacts on trust in megaprojects, but weak ties have a more significant positive effect than do strong ties. Unexpectedly, the introduction of interorganizational trust significantly weakens the effect of the strength of ties on project performance. The indirect influence of the strength of ties on performance has different paths. Weak ties have an indirect effect via calculative trust and relational trust. However, in a strong ties network, inferior stakeholders lack the information necessary to complete a megaproject, and they believe that calculative trust will not promote project performance until the megaproject is successfully delivered. Thus, the effect of calculative trust on project performance is not significant.

These findings provide evidence in regard to strength of ties governance being a part of the effective strategy in improving megaprojects’ performance. It also demonstrates the mediating function of trust and advances the current understandings of the underlying mechanism of the strength of ties on project performance, thus providing implications for researchers and practitioners. However, this study has some limitations. For example, the strength of ties and trust between organizations are a dynamic process in megaprojects. This study does not conduct in-depth analysis of the evolution mechanism and investigate the different levels of trust at different stages of the megaproject. Future research can be guided by these directions.

The main contribution of this study is fourfold. First, this study enriches the literature on strength of ties by accentuating the roles of trust in megaproject context. Second, this study contributes to the theoretical development of a conceptual model for explaining the interrelationships among strength of ties, types of trust and project performance. Third, this study responds to the call “which dimension (i.e. strong ties or weak ties) is more influential” by exploring the direct and indirect effects of strength of ties on project performance. Finally, this study breaks through the limitation of traditional cognition that megaproject management can be met by relying on rigid contracts. In other words, trust can supplement the weakness of rigid contract by forming contract flexibility with different strength of ties. Meanwhile, the specific strategies to establish and maintain trust are given, such as building information model (BIM) collaboration platform and reputation management mechanism.

The purpose of this paper is to explore top government hands-on megaproject management model applied to Istanbul’s new airport megaproject. The study aims to find an answer to this research question: “How is the organizational design and management of a megaproject that has been alive in a confrontational socio-political environment and whose national strategic importance is high?”

Organizational theory and critical theory perspectives are used in this study. Istanbul’s grand airport is chosen as the case study. Interview, focus group and document analysis methods are used together. The research yields data from qualitative resources. Verbal and written materials are organized into three major themes and 27 key subjects for content analysis.

A top level of organizational management can be attained in the state in order for the mega projects with high national strategic importance to survive without problems and with high performance. The top government-level organizational structure implemented at Istanbul’s new airport has reduced complexity, risk and uncertainty; increased performance and product quality; and strenghtened inter-organizational compatibility and communication within the megaproject organization. However, this structuring also increased centralization, reduced transparency and direct public participation in the decision-making process.

The megaproject is run in strict confidence and limited information is shared gradually in a controlled way with public by the megaproject organization. Therefore, a qualitative methodology is followed and the usage of quantitative data remained limited in the research.

The study presents an exemplary top government-level megaproject management model for countries experiencing strong socio-political conflicts and aiming to perform megaprojects with high national strategic importance.

The organization of Istanbul’s new airport megaproject offers an exemplary, flexible and innovative organizational management model for countries that want to realize mega projects with high national strategic importance and experience strong socio-political conflicts. The questions of how to cope with challenges, how to build management capabilities and how to improve the cooperation and coordination within megaprojects have found some answers with this study. In addition, this study provides an insight into how to make more effective objections to wrong megaproject practices and the right strategies that the opposing organizations can follow.

This empirical research widens and deepens the theoretical foundations of top government hands-on megaproject management. The study, which includes a process analysis, allows to better understand the philosophy, nature, success, planning process, social organization and dynamics of megaprojects and to explain them through the values and strategies of organizations.