Search results

Managing megaprojects is challenging due to their inherent complexity and uncertainty. Collaborative project delivery models have been introduced as an alternative to traditional project management in public infrastructure megaprojects and are often realized through collaborative contracts. These project organizations act as institutional arenas for logic interaction as actors with differing institutional backgrounds interact within the project. This paper aims to study the delivery phase of three megaprojects through an institutional lens, investigating the institutional interaction and alignment of logics therein.

A multiple case study was employed to reach deep insight into the phenomenon. Sixty-one interviews were conducted over 3 cases with representatives from all levels of the project hierarchy. Respondents were selected through snowball sampling. In two cases, observations of the shared project office were conducted. Data analysis built on first-order codes and second-order themes, collected into a theoretical framework.

The empirical evidence demonstrates the dynamics shaping institutional logics and gives evidence for changing logics in projects with a well-applied collaborative contract. However, there is a risk of resistance and a return to traditional logics since institutional change is slow and an unsuitably applied collaborative contract can lead to adherence to the conventional way of work.

Current research has focused on the regulatory framework and procurement phase of such models, but little attention has been given to the delivery phase and the interaction of conflicting logics. This paper can serve as an exemplar of the different logics found within public infrastructure projects and their interaction and alignment. Contributions include a heightened emphasis on the start of the project as a meeting point for differing institutional logics and the role change necessary when using a collaborative contract.

The purpose of this study is to test a model of healthcare professionals’ well-being seen as a consequence of a process of motivated professional identity construction, a variable that mediates the influence of the organizational identity (utilitarian or normative) and the perceived reputation of the profession on well-being.

Cross-sectional design, based on a survey of 384 healthcare professionals. Structural equation modeling with latent variables was used to test the model.

The data provide empirical evidence supporting the proposed model. We find that organizational identity (utilitarian and normative) and perceived professional reputation positively relate to professional identity, a variable that positively relates to well-being. Professional identity mediates the relationship between organizational identity (normative and utilitarian) and perceived professional reputation and well-being. Utilitarian organizational identity and perceived professional reputation are also directly related to well-being.

This research significantly departs from the current focus of explaining the well-being of healthcare professionals by resorting mainly to individual factors and introduces organizational and institutional determinants.

Megaprojects have large impact on the environment and stakeholders should take collective action to ensure that these projects are developed in a socially responsible manner. Hitherto, it is not known whether group and subjective norms and social identity could compel stakeholders to take socially responsible collective actions in megaprojects. The aim of this study is to design and test a model to boost stakeholders' intention to take socially responsible collective action in the context of mega water transfer projects in China.

A quasi-experimental causal research design was adopted to establish cause–effect relationships among the dependent variable (we-intention) and independent variables (subjective norms, group norms, social identity and desire). This study adopts the belief–desire–intention model and social influence theory to empirically investigate how to boost the stakeholders' intention to participate in socially responsible collective action. An online questionnaire survey was conducted and data was collected from 365 respondents who were involved in mega water transfer projects in China. The partial least squares structural equation modeling technique was employed to analyze the data.

The results from partial least squares analyses indicate that the presence of subjective norms, group norms and social identity (collectively known as social influence process) could increase stakeholders' intention to take socially responsible collective action. In addition, the desire to be socially responsible also boosts stakeholders' intention to take collective action. Desire partially mediates the relationship between social influence process and intention to take socially responsible collective action.

This study adds to existing knowledge by discovering social influence process as an antecedent to taking socially responsible collective action in megaprojects. Strong group norms and subjective norms could propel stakeholders to be more socially responsible. The study also adds to knowledge by discovering that stakeholders' desire to fulfill social responsibility also leads them to take concrete actions. Implications and recommendations are provided on how to manipulate different types of social influence processes to facilitate stakeholders to adopt socially responsible collective action in the process of managing megaprojects.

While corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been gaining support for the role it plays in employee outcomes, such as organizational identification (OID), the view of CSR from a social identity perspective is underdeveloped. This conceptual chapter explores the role of social identity processes grounded in organizational justice to develop a model of CSR attributions and the moderating role these attributions play in organizational member outcomes. CSR is understood as the relational processes happening with stakeholders, and these relationships engage specific organizational identity orientations. The social identity process flows from there, resulting in CSR attributions including strategic, relational, and virtuous. Using social identity, organizational identity, and organizational justice, this chapter makes two specific contributions: a CSR attribution typology grounded in organizational justice and the moderating impact of these attributions between activated justice dimensions and resulting organizational member outcomes.