81,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
The first book demonstrating how to apply the principles of social network analysis to managing complex projects
This groundbreaking book gets project managers and students up to speed on state-of-the-art applications of social network analysis (SNA) for observing, analysing, and managing complex projects. Written by an expert at the leading edge of the SNA project management movement, it clearly demonstrates how the principles of social network analysis can be used to provide a smarter, more efficient, holistic approach to managing complex projects.
Project managers, especially those tasked with managing large, complex construction and engineering projects, traditionally have relied upon analysis and decision-making based upon hierarchical structures and vaguely defined project systems, much of which is borrowed from historic scientific management approaches. However, it has become apparent that a more sophisticated methodology is required for observing project systems and managing relationships with today’s more knowledgeable and demanding clients. Social network analysis (SNA) provides just such an approach. Unfortunately, existing books on social network analysis are written primarily for sociologists and mathematicians, with little or no regard for the needs of project managers — until now. The first and only book of its kind, Managing Networks in Project-Based Organisations:
- Offers a framework and a fully-developed approach to applying SNA theory and methodologies to large, complex projects
- Describes highly effective strategies and techniques for managing the iterative and transient relationships between network-defining actor roles involved in the delivery of complex projects
- Uses numerous real-world examples and case studies of successful applications of SNA to large-scale construction and engineering projects around the world
- Draws on its author’s decades of experience managing complex projects for demanding clients, as well as his extensive academic research in Project Management
Managing Networks in Project-Based Organisations is an important working resource for project management professionals and consultants, especially those serving the construction and engineering industries. It is also an excellent text/reference for postgraduate students of project management and supply chain management, as well as academic researchers of project management.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 472
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
List of Figures
About the Author
Preface
Acknowledgements
1 Introduction
Structure of the Book
2 Theoretical Context
Management Context
Project Transitions
Project Management as Practice
Systems Theory and Networks
Transient Relationships
Dyadic Contractual Relationships and Structure
Permanent and Temporary Organising
Structure and Networks
Information Classification
Nodes and Linkages
Summary
3 Networks and Projects
Definition
Origins and History of the Concept of Social Networks and their Analysis
Problems with Projects
Actor Role Classification and Ritualistic Behaviour
Routines
Are Networks a Response to Uncertainty in Projects?
Temporary Project Systems and their Replication
Beyond the ‘Iron Triangle’
Why Networks?
Individuals and Firms in Networks
Problems Associated with the Use of SNA in Project Research
Summary
4 Why Networks?
Definition
Why Choose Social Network Analysis?
Problems Associated with the Use of SNA in Project Research
Concepts and Terminology
Defining the Population for the Study
What is a Network?
Actor Characteristics
Network Characteristics
Some Final Thoughts
Conclusion
5 Self‐Organising Networks in Projects
Introduction
What Do Project Clients Want?
Dangerous Assumptions
Implications if these Assumptions are Incorrect
Networks and Uncertainty
Does it Matter How We Conceptualise the Project?
Procurement Through Markets and Hierarchies; Project Design and Delivery Through Networks
Summary and Conclusions
6 Game Theory and Networks
Introduction
To Begin: Some History
What is a Game?
Key Assumptions
Benefits of Applying Game Theory to Project Networks
Other Considerations in Applying Game Theory to Project Networks
Choices About Actions and Co‐Players
Nash Equilibrium
Anti‐Coordination Behaviour: ‘Hawk–Dove’ and ‘Chicken’ Games
Game Theory and Information Exchange Network Formation
Game Theory and the Five Dangerous Assumptions in Projects
Summary and Conclusions
7 Network Roles and Personality Types
Network Roles
Personality Traits
Humour and Behaviour in Networks
Profiling an Ideal Project Network Actor
Specific Personality Traits
Network Roles and Personality Traits
Summary
8 Network Enabling
What Do We Mean by Network Enabling?
Trust
Empathy
Reciprocity, Favours and Psychological Contracts
Implications of Violation of Psychological Contracts
Generosity
Characteristics of Individuals that are Destructive for Networks
Narcissism
Egotism
Summary
9 Project Networks and Building Information Modelling
BIM Origins
Building Information Modelling and Information Management
Information Management and Organisation Structure
BIM as an Artefact
Self‐Organising Networks in the Context of Design
BIM and Networks: A Research Agenda
10 Introduction to the Case Studies
Technical Overview of Case Studies
Research Funding
Summary
11 Case Study 1: Communities in Self‐Organising Project Networks
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Findings
Communities in Self‐Organising Project Networks
Summary
12 Case Study 2: Dysfunctional Prominence in Self‐Organising Project Networks
Data Collection
Data Analysis
Actor Prominence Measures
Organisational Networks
Summary
13 Case Study 3: Costing Networks
Conceptual Framework
Network Costs
Data Analysis
Summary
14 Summary and Conclusions
Introduction
Chapter Summaries
Conclusions
Appendix: Case Study Questionnaire
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 06
Table 6.1 Game theory applied to construction projects.
Chapter 07
Table 7.1 Personality traits.
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 Network size, density and cost: Stage 1 and Stage 2 comparison.
List of Illustrations
Chapter 04
Figure 4.1 Tie strength and directed graphs.
Figure 4.2 Prominent disseminators (information exchange network).
Figure 4.3 Gatekeeper hoarders.
Figure 4.4 Isolates.
Figure 4.5 Isolated dyads and triads.
Figure 4.6 Boundary spanners.
Figure 4.7 Bridges.
Figure 4.8 Path lengths and bridges.
Figure 4.9 Isolates, density and isolated subgroup.
Figure 4.10 Tie strength and directed graphs: directionally weighted.
Chapter 05
Figure 5.1 Uncertainty in lump‐sum contracts.
Figure 5.2 Matrix governance.
Chapter 07
Figure 7.1 Prominent disseminators (information exchange network).
Figure 7.2 Gatekeeper hoarders.
Figure 7.3 Isolates.
Figure 7.4 Isolated dyads and triads.
Figure 7.5 Boundary spanners.
Figure 7.6 Bridges.
Chapter 08
Figure 8.1 The agency problem in projects.
Figure 8.2a Dealing with psychological contract violators in networks [before].
Figure 8.2b Dealing with psychological contract violators in networks [after].
Figure 8.3 Contagion of generosity: generalised reciprocity.
Figure 8.4 Contagion of generosity: third‐party influence.
Figure 8.5 Hub 'n' spoke.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Bank Station upgrade as existing.
Figure 10.2 Schematic 3D of proposed works.
Figure 10.3 Artist's impression of final scheme.
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 Information exchange network.
Figure 11.2 Community substructure within the network.
Figure 11.3 Multi‐functional clusters supporting design.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Degree centrality.
Figure 12.2 Influence or eigenvector centrality.
Figure 12.3 Brokerage or betweenness centrality.
Figure 12.4 Point centrality for project design communication network.
Figure 12.5 Influence or eigenvector centrality for project design communication network.
Figure 12.6 Brokerage or betweenness centrality for project design communication network.
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1 Network building and operation costs related to network density; based upon the Albert–Barabási model.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
ii
iv
v
xi
xii
xiii
xv
xvi
xvii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
165
166
167
168
169
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
Managing Networks in Project‐Based Organisations
Stephen Pryke
University College LondonLondon
This edition first published 2017© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Stephen Pryke to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered OfficesJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USAJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
Editorial Office9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyWhile the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication data applied for
ISBN: 9781118929926
Cover Design: WileyCover Image: Karen Rubin/Balamurugan Soundaraj
Dedication
This book is dedicated to Karen whose love has been unwavering and who encouraged me to make the time to share my work through the publication of this book.
It is also dedicated to my mother Betty, who has endured the hardships and indignities of old age with stoicism and cheerfulness.
Bless you both
List of Figures
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1
Tie strength and directed graphs.
Figure 4.2
Prominent disseminators (information exchange network).
Figure 4.3
Gatekeeper hoarders.
Figure 4.4
Isolates.
Figure 4.5
Isolated dyads and triads.
Figure 4.6
Boundary spanners.
Figure 4.7
Bridges.
Figure 4.8
Path lengths and bridges.
Figure 4.9
Isolates, density and isolated subgroup.
Figure 4.10
Tie strength and directed graphs: directionally weighted.
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1
Uncertainty in lump‐sum contracts.
Figure 5.2
Matrix governance.
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1
Prominent disseminators (information exchange network).
Figure 7.2
Gatekeeper hoarders.
Figure 7.3
Isolates.
Figure 7.4
Isolated dyads and triads.
Figure 7.5
Boundary spanners.
Figure 7.6
Bridges.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1
The agency problem in projects.
Figure 8.2a
Dealing with psychological contract violators in networks [before].
Figure 8.2b
Dealing with psychological contract violators in networks [after].
Figure 8.3
Contagion of generosity: generalised reciprocity.
Figure 8.4
Contagion of generosity: third‐party influence.
Figure 8.5
Hub ‘n’ spoke.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1
Bank Station upgrade as existing.
Figure 10.2
Schematic 3D of proposed works.
Figure 10.3
Artist’s impression of final scheme.
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1
Information exchange network.
Figure 11.2
Community substructure within the network.
Figure 11.3
Multi‐functional clusters supporting design.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1
Degree centrality.
Figure 12.2
Influence or eigenvector centrality.
Figure 12.3
Brokerage or betweenness centrality.
Figure 12.4
Point centrality for project design communication network.
Figure 12.5
Influence or eigenvector centrality for project design communication network.
Figure 12.6
Brokerage or betweenness centrality for project design communication network.
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1
Network building and operation costs related to network density; based upon the Albert–Barabási model.
About the Author
Dr Stephen Pryke is a Senior Lecturer in Project Management at the Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London. He is the Director of Studies for the MSc Project and Enterprise Management programme and Director of Postgraduate Teaching and Learning for the school. Stephen is founder and Managing Director of CONA – the Centre for Organisational Network Analysis (CONA@UCL). He has published four texts for Wiley Blackwell: The Management of Projects: A Relationship Approach (with Smyth), Collaborative Relationships in Construction (with Smyth), Supply Chain Management in Construction and most recently Social Network Analysis in Construction. He is a series editor of the RICS/Wiley Blackwell Innovation in Construction series and has contributed to Advanced Research Methods in the Built Environment (Knight and Ruddock (eds), 2008) and Managing the Professional Practice in the Built Environment (Smyth (ed.), 2011), both also published by Wiley Blackwell. He has published a number of papers in leading research journals dealing with supply chain management, social network analysis and the legal aspects of procurement reforms in the UK. His work has been presented to a number of international research conferences and his work on procurement and project management systems in France and China has been published by RICS. Most recently Stephen was commissioned by RICS to write a report on the links between transport hub evolution and property, entitled The Hub and the Place. Stephen is a reviewer for a number of leading academic journals and EPSRC. He is an RICS APC panel member for the RICS Project Management Faculty. He sits on the Infrastructure Supply Chain Management Roundtable for RICS and his work is also disseminated through Infrastructure UK (IUK). He has provided project management training and consultancy to a number of major European companies. He was a consultant to Durland Consulting in Chicago, USA. Prior to entering academia in the mid 1990s he held senior project management positions in both the public and private sectors within the UK. He is currently working with Crossrail, Transport for London and the Spanish contractor Drogados – applying social network analysis to major complex rail infrastructure schemes.
Preface
This book builds upon the ideas developed and presented in The Management of Projects: A Relationship Approach, Collaborative Relationships in Construction and more recently Supply Chain Management in Construction and Social Network Analysis in Construction (all published by Wiley Blackwell). My thinking on the management challenges facing those dealing with complex construction and engineering projects increasingly moves away from traditional ideas about projects and their management.
The book responds to requests from industry and the publisher to operationalise and apply the theory developed in Social Network Analysis in Construction. The centre I established at University College London to exploit and disseminate my research work in the area of social network analysis (SNA) and its application, particularly, to project environments in the construction and engineering fields, builds on the premise that there are gaps in what we know and discuss about organisational structures, procurement and systems. We procure resources and hope that those resources will organise themselves into systems that deliver excellent projects. Yet we understand very little about how those systems evolve and decay, and how they are managed. Most of all, I became disillusioned about the idea that delivering great projects could be achieved by assembling an array of discrete systems dedicated to the management of value or cost or design, and so on – what must surely comprise a ‘disintegrated’ approach to project management.
So much of our thinking in management and project management has been constrained by the terminology that has prevailed and our reluctance to eschew the rather hierarchical, quasi‐military models of organisational structures and their management. The Centre for Organisational Network Analysis (CONA@UCL – see http://www.ucl.ac.uk/cona) has engaged with a number of organisations in its short life so far; these have included Crossrail, Transport for London, the California High Speed Railway Group and Infrastructure UK (IUK), as well as Price Waterhouse Coopers and Deloittes. The recent bias toward rail infrastructure has reflected the prominence of rail infrastructure spending prevailing at the time that this book was being conceived and written. Earlier work using SNA on project case studies involved property developers and public sector clients. In fact, many of the challenges are the same whether you are building a leisure centre, commercial office space or rail infrastructure. The challenge fundamentally is to understand how people collaborate to deliver excellent projects; to make interventions where they don’t; and to replicate the best network configurations and behaviour over time.
The aim of the book was to challenge some of the traditional thinking on the conceptualisation of projects and their management and to bring human behaviour into more prominence in our ideas about successful delivery of projects. The aim was also to synthesise some of my thoughts on collaborative relationships. If we can express collaborative relationships as networks of actors, each with project function‐related roles, linked to others with needs and resources, then we can understand how our projects solve problems, overcome adversarial behaviour, create value, and innovate, as well as reducing time, cost and carbon emissions.
This book reflects the journey I have made as a practitioner from managing complex projects for demanding clients, over a period of 20 years, to doctoral research and the development of theory in the areas of collaborative relationships, supply chains and their management, and the conceptualisation of the project as a network of relationships. It has been a career of two halves – half in industry dealing with the issues on a daily basis; half in academia looking for theory and creative methods to understand those issues.
I have been very fortunate to have been based in the Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management at University College London for the last decade or more. The plethora of talented academics is too large to mention here but I have greatly benefitted from the exchange of knowledge that inevitably results from being based in such an environment. During my time at UCL I have led the master’s course in project management – MSc Project and Enterprise Management. This course, and others at UCL and the University of Cambridge, has benefitted from the ongoing research work that I have undertaken and I hope that those students have enjoyed the discussions around the ongoing research work. But I want to thank the students as well for challenging the new ideas – in a sense they acted as a test bed for many of the ideas that subsequently went into print or were implemented through training programmes and research bids. Teaching those bright young people from around the world has been a constant joy to me.
The perfect book, like the perfect PhD, is probably never finished and it is therefore almost inevitable that in publishing this book I have left stones unturned and questions unanswered. But I hope that you the reader will see this as a positive thing. The publication of the book is the beginning of a discussion and debate that will increase the depth of our knowledge in the application of social network analysis to the understanding of projects, but fundamentally will provide a framework for the management of project‐focused networks.
I sincerely hope that you enjoy reading this book and that you find something that challenges your thinking or helps you manage networks effectively. I have enjoyed putting the book together and capturing some of my thoughts in this important area of study.
S.D.P.London, UKDecember 2016
Acknowledgements
My thanks to each of the organisations that allowed me to work with them exploring the use of social network data to understand project networks. In particular I thank the team working on the Bank Station upgrade scheme, which was the subject of a Knowledge Transfer Partnership awarded to UCL, comprising Simon Addyman and Ed Watson at Transport for London (TfL), Dr Sulafa Badi, my colleague at UCL, and Balamurugan Soundaraj (Bala), the research associate for the Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) with TfL. My thanks also to the team from Drogados and those co‐located staff from consultants and subcontractors working on the £600M scheme. Some of the findings of the KTP have made their way into this book and it has served to provide a vehicle for the use of SNA on a mega ($1BN+) project.
Thanks to Infrastructure UK, in particular to Miles Ashley and Simon Murray for expressing an interest in my work on social network analysis and supply chain management maturity models. Both RICS and ICE have helped to publicise the importance of SNA in project team analysis.
Sincere thanks to the Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management at University College London for effectively sponsoring this book. My thanks also go to the Dean of the Faculty of the Built Environment, Professor Alan Penn, who took a personal interest in the work of CONA.
Finally, this book would not have happened without the long‐term support and encouragement I have been most fortunate to receive from Karen Rubin. Karen convinced me of the pressing need to get the book published; produced and revised a large number of figures; and edited the manuscript prior to submission to the publishers.
Thank You
1Introduction
Project management theory, and to some extent practice, have tended to focus on process, systems and documents. But projects are instigated, designed and delivered by human beings. This book focuses on the people involved in projects. It conceptualises the project as a social network, or more accurately, multiple layers of social networks, each network dedicated to the delivery of a particular project function. One of the exciting discoveries during the research that this book draws upon was the importance of self‐organising project networks, particularly in complex projects. In this book, I explore some of the factors that affect the behaviour of individuals as project actors, including game theory and personality type. I also consider the environmental and personal attributes that might enable networks to function more effectively, particularly in the context of the project. I look at Building Information Modelling (BIM), because there is an important link between the efforts being made in relation to BIM, and social networks. Finally, the book presents some case study material related to a two‐year research project which I led involving the Centre for Organisational Network Analysis and Transport for London.
The previous book in this series – Social Network Analysis in Construction (Pryke, 2012) – presented social network analysis (SNA) as an innovative method for the analysis of project organisations. It rationalised the SNA approach, looked at the importance of collaborative relationships in project organisations and proposed a theoretical framework to support the conceptualisation of the project as a network of relationships – contracts, information flows and financial incentives. The book proposed a model for the use of SNA which others might adopt in their research and presented four case studies, comparing collaborative, relationship‐based procurement and traditional strategies for procurement. The book provided an insight into the interpretation of network data derived from project‐based organisations and finally took a somewhat speculative look at how networks might be managed.
It was the chapter on managing networks that was in my view the most innovative, and Managing Networks aims to develop that theme using case study material gathered from recent research carried out at the Centre for Organisational Network Analysis at University College London (CONA@UCL). The raison d’être of CONA is to explore the void that is evident between procurement, systems and organisational hierarchies.
In our projects, we set about procuring resources, place those resources in structures that are often expressed either hierarchically or to a high level of abstraction, and then try to manage the self‐organising networks of human relationships that evolve, without conceptualising those relationships as networks. It is little wonder that we often find it difficult to analyse why some projects seem to be successful and others less so. A small group of those associated with CONA@UCL set about trying to classify, and to some extent quantify, organisationally, the ‘good’ projects and the ‘bad’ projects, using the language of the social network analysts. Examples of this work are: Badi and Pryke (2006), Badi et al. (2014), Badi et al. (2016a and 2016b), Doloi et al. (2016), Pryke et al. (2017), Pryke et al. (2015a and 2015b), Pryke (2014), Pryke et al. (2014), Pryke et al. (2013), Pryke and Badi (2013), Shepherd and Pryke (2014), El‐Sheikh and Pryke (2010), Pryke (2005a and 2005b), Pryke and Pearson (2006).
So, this book aims to respond to the needs of several groups: those who ask what the social network theory of project organisations is; the practitioners who ask ‘how can I use social network analysis to run smarter projects’; the students who ask how we can start teaching project management in a way that helps them to identify network and actor characteristics – to classify project coalition activity and the actors involved in network terms and to start to build toward defining management in a project‐based environment in network terms.
The analysis and representation or visualisation of project‐focused activity has involved task‐dependency‐based approaches, structural analysis (hierarchical) and process mapping, all of which fail to reflect the relationships that deliver our projects – relationships that we can classify by project function.
Structure of the Book
Chapter 2: Theoretical Context This chapter locates the concept of managing networks within a context of managing projects and their supply chains. A number of assumptions have been made about the nature of projects around which procurement and project management practices have evolved. I argue in Chapter 2 that our choice of procurement and the subsequent project management strategies applied have not kept pace with the complexity of many projects. It is also argued that at the point where procurement is completed (and resources identified and secured) a transition occurs where those resources have to configure themselves into systems that will deliver a successful project. We know little of how these self‐organising systems evolve. Our lack of awareness means that we typically do not facilitate or manage these systems.
The chapter reflects on the vestiges of scientific management that still remain in project management research and practice. The fact that our projects are delivered by unpredictable, sometimes irrational, imperfect human beings seems sometimes to be ignored in our discussion about programming, risk management and the whole range of sub‐systems that we typically bring together in project management. The chapter concludes by pointing to the fact that our highly‐connected lives no longer rely on distinguishing task and social structure. Human beings essentially get things done through links to other human project actors. The idea that everything that does not constitute a formal direction or instruction under the terms of the contract should be classified as ‘informal’ is firmly rejected. There has, perhaps, been some confusion between informal and recreational ties. Although recreational ties are undoubtedly fascinating and important, this book does not deal with them.
The chapter provides a context and perhaps rationale for the chapters that follow. The key themes are developed in more depth in these subsequent chapters.
Chapter 3: Networks and Projects This chapter starts with the reflection that the last fifty years have brought only modest progress in our understanding of ‘systems… functions…interrelationships, and the location and prominence of…control and coordination centres’ (Higgin and Jessop, 1965: 56). In fact many of the techniques that we use to manage projects seem to ignore all of these issues. The chapter makes a start on the formulation of sub‐systems that might be studied to enable a better understanding of how projects are really managed. The concepts of ritualistic behaviour and routines are introduced and I reflect on the fact that individuals are attracted to routines because they provide consistency and stability, and reduce mental effort (Becker, 2004).
This chapter refers to Morris’ (2013) discussions about the maturity of project definition, or more accurately the tendency for project definition frequently to be insufficiently mature at the point of transition between pre‐ and post‐contract stages. The idea that this uncertainty, exacerbated by continually increasing complexity, leads to project actors forming networks to secure information, solve problems and disseminate processed information is introduced and rationalised. It is argued that at the transition from resource procurement to project delivery, routines are not adequate in the face of complexity in both task and structure. I ask the reader to move on from discussions about the ‘iron triangle’ for the reasons that: it is very difficult to define client needs at a stage early enough to use procurement successfully; it is difficult to avoid agency problems in procurement and delivery; and, arguably, change in project definition improves value to client and end‐users, rather than the reverse. It is not possible to allocate project and supply chain roles accurately and to maintain these roles as a constant throughout the entire project design and delivery period. Project systems are iterative and transient and this is to a great extent not reflected in the contractual relationships established through many procurement approaches.
The chapter provides an introduction to project actor characteristics (drawn from Pryke, 2012), and an overview is given of network characteristics (path lengths and density) and linkage characteristics (tie strength or value and direction). The chapter ends with a reflection on the question posed – why networks? – and makes a link to Chapter 4. The chapter concludes that the identification and analysis of interaction networks between the individuals engaged to deliver a project is the only way to observe the self‐organising, complex project function‐related networks that hold the key to understanding successful and unsuccessful project delivery. If we can understand and map these networks, we can define the actor roles and network configurations that constitute successful project delivery and begin to replicate and eventually to manage these networks.
Chapter 4: Why Networks? The chapter starts with some discussion about the origins of SNA and references to Nohria and Eccles’ (1992) work on rationalising the use of SNA in organisations. I emphasise that in a project environment it is important to distinguish between the two types of actors: individuals and firms. Contracts are established between firms and projects are delivered through relationships between individuals. I discuss some of the issues to be considered when applying SNA to project and supply chain research – the quantitative/interpretative paradigm; the issue of causality and the complexity of SNA as an analytical approach; the importance of precise network classification; and the limitations arising from sampling. Studying and managing projects that are highly complex in terms of technical content, as well as process, inevitably leads to complexity in both analysis and management approaches.
Some basic SNA terminology is discussed as a preamble to the analysis and discussion in later chapters. A structure for the analysis of projects (and in particular construction and engineering projects) is introduced. I suggest that while traditional project management analytical tools and management approaches essentially pursue the ‘iron triangle’ of cost, time and quality, clients’ and stakeholders’ needs are sophisticated and complex, requiring a more finely‐grained approach to both analysis and management.
I end this chapter with a call for more research using SNA in projects and provide some details about suitable software and the identification of network boundaries for research.
Chapter 5: Self‐Organising Networks in Projects In this chapter I further develop the theme that procurement and project management strategies have not kept pace with rapidly increasing complexity in projects. I discuss the increased prevalence of temporary, project‐related organisation forms in a range of industries. Film and software tend to be highly creative but construction and engineering are perceived to be more routine‐based. Yet this is contentious and many involved in major construction and engineering projects would emphasise the need for creativity in finding design solutions and in problem‐solving. The chapter considers what clients want from projects and although many clients may not express it in those terms, ‘completeness’ is felt to be of primary concern to most clients. I assert that the previous focus on the iron triangle in the context of financial incentive for designers and constructors is dysfunctional in terms of the client’s needs and leads to ritualistic behaviour by project actors. In this context, the chapter moves on to focus upon what I refer to as some ‘dangerous assumptions’.
These dangerous assumptions move in chronological order through project procurement and delivery, starting with the definition of client needs. The definition of clients’ needs, the difficulty of achieving an accurate representation of those needs in documentary form by human or technological means, the fact that changes in project definition have been regarded as undesirable, and the accuracy and sustainability of role allocation in a long‐term, uncertain project environment, are all discussed as possible reasons for our misunderstanding the reasons for failure in project design and delivery.
The discussion turns to the evolution of project management over time and I move through production orientation, functional management, information processing and my own work with Smyth on the relationship approach (Pryke and Smyth, 2006). I ask the question that I frequently put to practising project managers and postgraduate students – ‘why does it matter how we conceptualise the project?’ I emphasise the need to find a means of understanding the ‘non‐linear, complex, iterative and interactive’ processes that projects constitute (Pryke, 2012). If we can be clear how we conceptualise projects, we can be clear about the way in which we understand and monitor projects and formulate an effective means of managing those projects.
The chapter closes with some case study findings which conclude that:
Self‐organising networks form quickly when project actors are under pressure to gather and disseminate information
Some actors place themselves into prominent positions for personal reasons that are detrimental to the delivery of the project
Although at contract placement stage, typically the client formally enters a lump‐sum contract, much of the design of the construction project has still to be done, which carries uncertainty (and particularly financial uncertainty) for the client
Short path lengths between the client and Tier 2 subcontractors are useful in terms of managing design evolution and maintaining knowledge transfer
Large, confident clients will internalise risk if this is the most effective way to deal with risk, not hesitating to involve themselves with Tier 2 subcontractors to resolve design issues and minimise risk.
Finally, I suggest that we will manage projects more effectively if we conceptualise them as networks of actor relationships.
Chapter 6: Game Theory and Networks The chapter starts with a discussion of the transition between resource acquisition and project delivery. Roles are allocated to individuals as project actors through contracts, but as soon as work starts, whether it is design or production of some sort, actors acquire roles that are related to their network position and network role (for more detail on the latter refer to Chapter 9, Pryke, 2012). The behaviour of individuals as project actors is a function of their network role. Project actors are also influential in network terms – their behaviour affects the way in which the network functions and modifies the behaviour of other project actors.
Social network analysts frequently place relatively low emphasis on the characteristics of human actors, preferring to map network configurations and characteristics alongside the characteristics of the links between actors. In this chapter I remind the reader that human beings are more than simply ‘human resources’ to be placed within a system. Game theory helps us to understand how human actors behave in certain environments – with their behaviour being perhaps unpredictable or even irrational.
Chapter 6 provides a little history about game theory and then reviews the research carried out on the application of game theory to construction projects. The chapter looks at the definition of game theory and discusses case study material which illustrates the way that actors (or in the game theory context, ‘players’) make decisions in relation to the risk context in which they find themselves. The subjects of ‘payoff’ and completeness of knowledge about the game and the players are discussed, and it is noted that the study of game theory environments involving low levels of knowledge about the structure of the game and the payoff is developing into a field of study in its own right. Finally, the link between the behaviours of individuals and the theory is made. Cooperative or collaborative game theory is distinguished from non‐cooperative or competitive game theory – and perhaps this distinction sits at the heart of the difference between collaborative project behaviours and opportunistic project behaviour.
I discuss some of the benefits of applying game theory to project networks. These include: the importance of finding some sort of equilibrium following adaptations to environmental factors; the fact that decisions made by individuals reflect past decisions by other actors; and the operation of incentive design in encouraging self‐interested human beings to behave in a way that maximises the benefit that a given network might have in delivering a given project. Complexity and rationality are important factors in this discussion about game theory and networks.
I apply game theory to the information exchange network and its evolution and decay. We also return to the five dangerous assumptions put forward in a previous chapter to see how game theory might be used in that context. I conclude the chapter by asserting that game theory is relevant to the concept of managing networks in a project context through:
Calculation of payoff and self‐interests
The accuracy of knowledge about the game, the players and the environment
The identity and behaviour of all other players
Games played in low levels of knowledge
The rationality of players
The importance of the external environment and the fact that this does not prevent players from selecting a particular strategy.
Chapter 7: Network Roles and Personality Types Little has been written about personality type in the context of networks (with the possible exception of Mehra et al. (2001), which took a rather specific aspect of personality type). Very little indeed appears to have been written linking project networks with personality type. Chapter 7 was intended as a thought‐provoking and speculative discussion about the topic of network roles and personality type, with a view to developing some theory and an agenda for future research.
The chapter recaps on the main actor types found in projects (these were dealt with in more detail in Pryke (2012)). I then outline the aspects of personality identified in personality trait theory.
The discussion turns to the use of humour in networks. Long and Graesser (1988) offered a classification of humour based upon an analysis of television shows and the audience reaction to them. They offer the following classifications: irony, satire, sarcasm, overstatement and understatement, self‐deprecation, teasing, replies to rhetorical questions, clever replies to incongruous statements, double entendres, transformation of frozen expressions, and puns. Having explored the terminology of humour, the discussion turns to an exploration of the ways in which humour might help in project‐based networks. I ask why humour is associated with leisure and not work, despite findings from Martin’s (2007) research that humour results in higher levels of happiness and better health, creative thinking and problem‐solving in the workplace. I conclude that more work needs to be done to establish the effects of humour in the workplace and specifically in the project network environment.
There is a discussion about cohesiveness and humour; specifically how humour might build better links between actors in project networks over time. Conversely the subversive effect of negative or critical humour is discussed. Dwyer (1991) noted that the relative power of an individual is reflected by who the joke teller is, who the target of the joke is and who laughs.
I offer a formulation of a ‘network person’ – behaviours that enable networks to function well.
I then review the behaviours in the context of the personality traits identified earlier in the chapter and particularly in relation to the main project network actor types. I conclude that personality type and behaviour are not commonly associated with network analysis but suggest that the combination could be important in understanding how it is that some project networks appear to be very effective, while others appear to find difficulty in delivering successful projects.
Chapter 8: Network Enabling The chapter starts with a reflection on the types of relationships that we find in the project environment – essentially interpersonal relationships within the firm and between firms, and inter‐organisational relationships which in the project context tend to be dyadic contractual relationships. While the sister publication to this book (Pryke, 2012) covered both interpersonal and inter‐organisational relationships, this book focuses on interpersonal relationships within and between firms.
The case is made for consideration to be given to the environment in which the networks being studied are operating. Although environmental issues potentially represent unwanted variables in the context of the analysis of network data, if we are to use SNA to deliver better projects, these environmental issues need to be considered. The chapter suggests that alongside the environmental issues noted above, certain factors influence the evolution, maintenance and eventual decay of interpersonal networks. These factors are:
Trust – the existence and maintenance of trust
Empathy – the ability to place ourselves in the position of others and to relate to that position and the constraints and anxieties associated with it
Reciprocity – the extent to which individuals are willing and able to respond to efforts made by others, to provide advice or project information, for example
Favours – the willingness to grant favours to others, regardless of previous reciprocal activity
Generosity – the context for reciprocity and the granting of favours.
Set against these positive influential factors are: competitiveness, narcissism and egotism. These are frequently present in networks that appear to operate inefficiently for otherwise inexplicable reasons.
The chapter looks at the environmental conditions affecting interpersonal networks and reflects on the factors that have a positive impact on network evolution, maintenance and decay, as well as those factors having a negative impact. I conclude that good network behaviour is contagious. The pursuit and encouragement of behaviour that promotes trust, empathetic behaviour, reciprocity and generosity are fundamental to improving network performance. Ironically, behaviour that tends to improve career advancement, including appointment to organisations, is the very behaviour that creates difficulty in forming and maintaining communication networks.
Chapter 9: Project Networks and BIM In Chapter 9 I acknowledge that only weak links exist between organisational network analysis and building information modelling, both in terms of research and practice. The chapter links back to the ‘five dangerous assumptions’ identified earlier in the book. In particular, it is noted that projects do not always accurately interpret clients’ wishes, for a range of reasons.
The chapter deals with a brief history of the term ‘building information modelling’ from its early beginnings in the mid‐1980s. The development of software providing the third dimension alongside the first two dimensions and subsequently adding cost and time is discussed. BIM is discussed alongside its more generic cousin, information management, and I reflect on the location of highly specialised design expertise associated with technically complex projects and the effect that this relocation of knowledge and expertise has upon the procurement of design and the systems through which we monitor and manage design.
The chapter moves on to consider liability for and ownership of design, and responsibility for design coordination. Intellectual property rights are also identified as an important factor in the successful implementation of BIM. The effect of organisational structure and information technologies are dealt with through reference to the work of Whyte and Levitt (2010). Coordination is clearly an issue and social interactions are an important aspect of this coordination. BIM is frequently regarded as a ‘clash detection’ system, ignoring its potential for managing and modelling design along with cost and time parameters. The question is raised as to the potential effect of the full implementation of BIM on contractual ‘completeness’ and the consequent effects on contractual disputes and their resolution. The question whether BIM is an artefact in the context of the project or the system through which the project is designed is raised.
I conclude the chapter by suggesting that SNA and BIM are theoretically complementary. I acknowledge the work of Al Hattab and Hamzeh (2015) but suggest that research is needed on nodal characteristics; network actor roles; comparison between the three types of centrality measures for project actors; network topography; and, finally, cluster identification. This chapter aims to promote discussion and develop a research agenda in this area, given the relatively little research that currently exists.
Chapter 10: Introduction to the Case Studies This chapter provides a description of the project from which the three case studies were taken. The project comprises a rail infrastructure interchange upgrade costing approximately £600 M at the time of going to press. The chapter deals with some of the particular challenges of gathering network data in a busy design project environment.
Chapter 11: Case Study 1 This case study principally dealt with the application of community detection in social networks – relatively small clusters of actors with relatively high density, embedded within a network context of lower levels of network density. This approach to the analysis of a large and complex project – complex both technically and organisationally – challenged some of the traditional views about how projects should be procured and how they proceed. The research found, inter alia, that decision‐making and problem‐solving are important in the way in which project actors execute their design roles. In particular the coordination function is prominent when we look at actor relationships in the design phase. The chapter concludes that there is a gap between what is routinely procured in terms of roles and the roles that are acquired through project actors’ network positions.
Chapter 12: Case Study 2 This case study looks at the concept of ‘dysfunctional prominence’. The data were gathered from the same large rail infrastructure project used in Case Study 1. I discuss the relative merits of point, eigenvector and betweenness centrality in analysing complex projects. The comparison of the values for centrality generated by using these three measures enables us to identify actors who hoard information unnecessarily in information exchange networks. In this case the dysfunctional prominence was identified coincidentally with management interventions to resolve matters. A study carried out at an earlier stage in the project could have identified the trend toward the inappropriate hoarding of project information and enabled earlier intervention. I argue that dysfunctional prominence is a risk to all information exchange project networks and is related to personality type.
Chapter 13: Case Study 3 In the third and final case study I reflect upon the static nature of the roles and responsibilities allocated through project procurement. I consider the cost of network evolution over time and suggest that this is an aspect of project networks that is in its infancy. The case study took the Barabási and Albert (1999) and Erdös and Rényi (1960) models for network evolution and applied these to the case study project using data on actor cost per day. The chapter concluded that it is potentially very useful to profile network evolution and decay costs in the project context. There is a period in the evolutionary cycle of a project network between 2 and 20 actors where scaling costs are disproportionately high. This suggests that project managers should consider network interventions in those early stages of network evolution to enable connections to be formed quickly and effectively, thus helping to reduce the disproportionate cost of network evolution. I suggest the establishment of a network broker team, whose role it would be to facilitate information exchange linkages and to diffuse disputes over role negotiation between project actors.
Chapter 14: Summary and Conclusions In the final chapter I synthesise the twelve preceding chapters and draw out the key arguments and conclusions developed in this book. The theory is developed and some speculative discussion associated with future research agendas is set out. I reflect on the three case studies, which provide a small sample of some of the findings of a two‐year research project which was completed just before publication of this book.
I hope that this overview of the book will encourage the reader to dip into particular areas of interest. For those with no background in social networks, the previous book, Social Network Analysis in Construction (Pryke, 2012), is recommended as a precursor to this book.
2Theoretical Context
This chapter is aimed at establishing a context for the conceptualisation of the project as a network of relationships. The purpose of the chapter is not to build a theoretical framework for the analysis later in the book. Rather, it is to locate this book within the context of the study of project management. Some might argue this is exactly what a theoretical framework does. But I will build some theory later in the book that explains the relevance of social network analysis, and then move toward some network theories relating to the management of project‐based networks.
Management Context
Projects are delivered in a ‘project environment’. The project environment will have a range of characteristics that will differ between projects but that may include: external threats imposed by government, the economy, overseas competitors and changes brought about by a rapidly developing technological context; the extent of interdependencies in relationships, which will vary with the complexity of the project specification and process; previous experience within identical coalitions or those with common membership; pressure of time at design stage, tender stage and during delivery; lack of certainty about scope of task, project and/or programme.
The contracting process has evolved in a context of increasing complexity in projects and it is argued here that the assumptions that we make and on which much of current procurement and project management thinking is based are becoming increasingly irrelevant. Later in the book I look at some of the assumptions that are made when procuring and delivering projects – the five dangerous assumptions (see Chapter 5). The case study material in Chapters 10–13 contains evidence that the social networks that perform the main functions of project management are essentially self‐organising and frequently perform roles that are not procured through the contracting system. This is contentious and threatens much of our traditional theory and practice in this area. This self‐organisation is a function of the transition between the pre‐ and post‐contract phases of projects. But although there is governance in place within the context of the organisations delivering projects (the resources procured to deliver the project), once these individuals become full‐time or part‐time members of the temporary project organisation, there is relatively little governance of the project delivery. Later I will argue that individuals are driven by the need to acquire and disseminate project information – they are driven into forming networks through a range of relationships in pursuit of a range of objectives.
Project Transitions
Transitions are an essential element of the temporary organisation (Jacobsson et al., 2013) and both internal (endogenous) and external (exogenous) environments affect the way in which project ‘routines’ are established and evolved (Billinger and Becker, 2014). Some of these routines are codified and quite explicit. In this book I want to look at those routines that are not codified and that come about through project role‐holding actors striving to fulfil their roles efficiently. We need to take an interest in the project governance arrangements that evolve and the transactional structures associated with this governance (Jones and Lichtenstein, 2008; Winch, 2014) in our study of more effective project management.
Project Management as Practice
There is a need for a more fine‐grained approach to understanding our projects, linking more closely to the ‘project management as practice’ school of thought (Lalonde et al., 2012). Winter et al. (2006) suggest that project management research should refocus away from the highly conceptual theoretical position toward a more practice and practitioner focus. Real projects are increasingly perceived to be more complex, unpredictable and ‘multidimensional’ than the project management literature, based upon a rational and deterministic premise, would suggest. Winter et al. (2006) suggest that we need new ways of looking at projects that take account of the complexity of social interaction within a context of politics and power. Ika and Hodgson (2010) argue that power, domination, manipulation and exploitation are important underlying concepts in understanding temporary organisations. So perhaps we should move from the question ‘what is a project’ toward ‘what do we do collectively when we have a role in a project’ (Hodgson and Cicmil, 2006). This is a question that is at the heart of the material presented in this book – what do people do when they design and deliver projects? This information is not currently visible to those who commission and manage projects.
The extent to which organisational theory helps us with the formulation of theory that relates to project management is an interesting point. We clearly need better‐developed theory relating to projects (Monsanto et al., 2013). Borg and Söderlund (2014) recognised that temporary project organisations are ‘embedded’ within organisational theory. They also refer to the importance of ‘qualitative’ studies into the ‘real life’ of project management and into the practices that are associated with the ‘social processes’ inherent in complex projects. Burger and Sydow (2014) call for research that explores the relationship between the permanent and temporary aspects of projects and the dynamic, transient and time‐defined nature of organisation in temporary organisations. Pryke (2012) also emphasised the importance of understanding the relationships in temporary project organisations as transient. Our procurement practices do not envisage any change in roles and responsibilities throughout the entire post‐contract phase of a project. The transient nature of projects represents a source of potential risk to project clients – understanding the nature of this transience is a first step toward managing those transient networks of relationships hidden from view in our projects.
Systems Theory and Networks
So, we have moved a long way forward since the early days of ‘Taylorism’ (Taylor, 1911), and the other scientific management school protagonists (see also Weber (1946) and Fayol (1919), for example). Following this scientific school, management thinking moved on to what was referred to as the ‘informal’ aspects of projects. At this time Maslow (1943) and others seemed to regard social interaction as ‘informal’ rather than as being at the very core of what humans do, whether in pursuit of friendship or love, or simply the attempt to earn a living within a project organisation. By the middle of the twentieth century, systems theory had taken hold, principally through the work of von Bertalanffy (1979) and Boulding (1956). Systems theory was embraced by academics but was typically presented at too high a level of abstraction for the practitioner. Although social network analysis (SNA) was being discussed in some circles – most notably by sociologists and mathematicians – it had not been married with systems theory. This is a pity because SNA and systems thinking make very happy bedfellows. Much later Walker (2015) explored in some detail the idea that projects need to be open systems (and/or perhaps sub‐systems of client systems) to deal with the continually changing environment in which all but the very simplest projects are designed and delivered. Although Walker’s work on open systems in projects was well received, some would claim that this new framework typically did little to improve the success of projects (see Flyvberg et al., 2003; Crawford and Helm, 2009, among others). Denis et al
