In this article, we discuss the concept of safetywashing defined as the strategic practice of promoting, marketing, and branding of safety practices without full disclosure of negative information to improve the image of the organization. The research seeks to answer two questions: first, what are safetywashing strategies? Second, what are the effects of safetywashing strategies? To study this, 106 news articles relating to construction safety in India, as well as 439 reader comments on them, were systematically collected and their contents analyzed to compile multiple case studies which had evidence of safetywashing. We analyze multiple instances from these case studies to build theoretical insight into these strategies and their effects, using an approach anchored in a social exchange theoretical framework. We highlight different safetywashing strategies employed in the construction sector, such as safety as a project objective, explaining safety initiatives, associating with pioneers, as well as investing in safety. These strategies lead to accepting of organizations, prioritizing safety, and diverting focus, all of which have different implications for safety practice in the construction industry.@en

In this article, co-authors Johan Ninan, Stewart Clegg, Ashwin Mahalingam, and Shankar Sankaran reflect on their research interests and the inspiration behind their recent article, “Governance Through Trust: Community Engagement in an Australian City Rebuilding Precinct,” found in the Project Management Journal.@en

The concept of governmentality has proven useful to analyse how the reflexive management of people within and without the project is conducted. In this chapter we explore the organizational theory of governmentality and its importance in project settings. First, we identify the specificity of project governance and relate it to the definition and discussion of governmentality by Michel Foucault. Following this, the use of governmentality within projects through project culture is discussed. Subsequently, the use of governmentality outside projects through social media is discussed. Finally, the chapter concludes by highlighting new directions for research with governmentality as the focal point, discussing the types of research questions that a concern with projects and governmentality raises and how addressing these might further develop project management as a field of enquiry.@en

Infrastructure megaprojects are increasing in size and number worldwide. Widespread shortcomings such as cost overruns, delays, litigious threats, and community opposition are now so pervasive there is a clear mandate to rethink the way we plan, deliver, and operate our infrastructure. In this context, we situate this research to understand how megaprojects can be set up for success. Data were collected from responses to a questionnaire survey, interviews, and case studies. The questionnaire was fielded by multiple agencies involved in infrastructure projects, such as engineers, construction organizations, and government delivery agencies. For qualitative insights, we conducted 30 interviews with participants from these agencies and studied cases that successfully implemented the themes identified. The results highlight the three themes with the highest impact in delivering projects successfully: (1) Improved integrated planning, business cases, and front-end engineering design; (2) efficient use of contracts; and (3) strengthening government and political engagement. This research contrasts the literature on megaproject success with data collected from questionnaires, case studies, and interviews. Collecting solutions that have solved issues effectively is an innovative aspect of our methodology, with these findings holding considerable value for ecosystem practitioners. Thus, we contribute by highlighting eight cost-effective, relevant, and efficient ways for reimagining infrastructure megaproject delivery.@en

City rebuilding precincts are embedded in, surrounded by, and sometimes resisted or celebrated by stakeholders they impact. These projects require long-lasting relationships and loyalty from the community they serve, making trust a crucial factor. This article employs a case study approach and draws from both social exchange and circuit of power theories to understand the complex relationship between trust and governance. Three strategies emerged from the analysis: employing resources, building legitimacy, and creating a brand. These strategies and their interactions highlight how trust can act as a governance mechanism for more effective engagement with the project community.@en

This chapter presents a holistic investigation into construction culture from an organisation studies as well as project management perspective, mobilising the concept of toxic project cultures as a novel conceptual lens to explore new ways to transform the construction industry into a more dynamic, innovative, and socially responsible sector. All levels of culture will need to change, and to be effective, attention on the part of project leadership to the change process is required on an everyday basis. Inter-organisational strategic change projects can serve as 'temporary trading zones', in which actors from different organisations bring in different work practices, narratives, norms, and values, thus creating opportunities for experimenting, knowledge exchange, and changing behaviour. In these arenas, doing things in unusual ways should always be on the agenda, to unlearn ingrained routines. Unlearning involves very different cognitive processes to learning.

@en

Under the rubric of project governance, governmentality has been defined as a general mode of governing people in projects, whether these projects are organized in an authoritarian, liberal, or neo-liberal mode in their approach to authority relations. We argue that governmentality is a specifically neo-liberal form of social integration, one that stresses the freedom of its subjects, and discuss how it extends governance beyond enforcing contracts and includes all stakeholders. Examples of governmentality in the modern era of projects are discussed as a proactive strategy conceptualized in five contexts in which the concept of governmentality, as governing through freedoms, has been applied in project ecologies. These include governance by contract, governance by alliancing, governance by influence, governance by co-optation, and governance by incorporation. The degree of governmentality in play increases through the sequence.@en

During the construction and operation phases, infrastructure projects face social unrest, such as community protests, boycotting of services as well as negative press reports of these events and other aspects of the project. There is a need to consider the concerns and moral issues of the community throughout the lifecycle and not just at the inception phase. From an organizational power perspective, we use frame analysis as a suitable lens to understand how projects shape community perceptions to try and construct sustainable legitimacy. The research reports on a case study of a metro rail project in India. 166 daily news articles, 446 user comments and 30 semi-structured interviews with the project team were analysed. We observed framing strategies used in practice, such as need framing, pride framing, community-centric framing and blame framing. These framing strategies observed in the project community had impacts labeled as the solution frame, the trend-setter frame, the important frame and the own-up frame. The relationship between the framing strategies and their effects are theorized through four propositions. We argue that through these framing strategies some issues were strategically hidden while some were strategically promoted, thereby influencing the perception of the project. An improved perception of the project can reduce resistance and conflicts during the construction and operation of the project.

@en

Megaprojects are plagued with failures and inefficiencies, often due to an inability to handle the obstacles that occur throughout the process. The present research deepens and extends our understanding of the obstacles and causes of poor megaproject performance by drawing on the ‘circuits of power’ as a theoretical framework for analyzing such projects. Empirically, we investigate what are regarded as some frequent obstacles occurring in megaprojects in the Australian and New Zealand context, such as coordination issues between stakeholders, poor estimates of the project, and inefficient contracts. Conducting 40 semi-structured interviews with different participants in the sector enables us to highlight that the overt obstacles were dependent on covert causes, such as fragmented industry, political push for projects and an owner-centric industry, respectively. For addressing these covert causes, we record innovative interventions such as delivery through precincts, creating a pipeline of projects, and raising awareness among contractors. We create a framework anchored in the circuits of power theory to show the relationships between overt obstacles, covert causes and suggested solutions. Infrastructure megaprojects can be set up for success by addressing the covert causes through proper interventions, such as changing culture and implementing innovations.

@en

External stakeholder management is important for managing an infrastructure asset throughout its life cycle. There is a dearth of research exploring the asset creation team's rationalities invoking the strategies used for managing external stakeholders. The circuits-of-power theoretical framework, which considers actors within their social context, is apt for studying the rationale of the asset creation team in carrying out these strategies. Through a systematic in-depth case study of a metro rail asset in India, diverse data were collected from multiple sources, such as semi-structured interviews, news articles and social media; a set of strategic rationalities used to frame messages to stakeholders was identified. These included pride in the asset, importance of the asset, overemphasis on time and acceptability of public inconvenience. The asset creation team, as part of the broader asset community, is also influenced by the strategic discourses aimed at managing external stakeholders. The authors discuss the implications of the strategic discourses used for asset management on project, programme and portfolio management. The relationship between strategic discourses striving to manage assets and the corresponding asset creation team rationalities affords multiple avenues for future research.

@en

External stakeholder support is critical to the success of megaprojects, necessitating strategic engagement, often using Information and Communications Technology (ICT). We conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with a megaproject team and analysed their social media communications with the project community. The findings show three ICT practices used for managing external stakeholders: visualisation, simulation and social mediatisation. Taking a sociomateriality lens we demonstrate how these practices are used for diverse unintended uses to manage external stakeholders. Anchored in a dimensions of power framework, we discuss how these ICT practices were strategically used for persuading, framing and hegemonizing external stakeholders in megaprojects. Theoretically, we highlight the role of ICT for managing external stakeholders over the current use of improving the competitive advantage of internal stakeholders. Practically, social media is used to articulate practices in all the strategic roles, positioning it in a role as a critical ICT tool for external stakeholder management in infrastructure megaprojects.

@en

Infrastructure megaprojects can cause considerable inconvenience to external stakeholders such as project communities, stakeholders in lands and stakeholders in existing services. Managing these external stakeholders is difficult as they interact with the project across permeable boundaries, are unaccountable to the requirements of the project and cannot be governed with contractual instruments or conformance to standards, as is the case with internal stakeholders. Hence the project team must resort to other strategies to manage these stakeholders. There is at present little other than scattered accounts of the use of these strategies in the literature. What is missing is a framework to explain how such strategies work to manage external stakeholders. We use organizational power theories drawn from frameworks stressing both the dimensions and the circuits of power to understand how strategy and power interact in the process of managing external stakeholders. This research uses the case study of a metro rail project in India compiled from 30 semi-structured interviews, 168 news media articles along with their 446 user comments, and 640 social media tweets along with 435 community comments. Using a qualitative research methodology, we highlight relations of persuading, framing and hegemonizing strategies employed for managing the external stakeholders in the project. Covert power-based framing and hegemonizing strategies shape the visible overt power-based persuading strategies employed to manage external stakeholders.

@en

This paper explores subtle strategies that megaproject teams develop in practice to manage stakeholders external to the project team. A governmentality approach is used to account for these strategies. A metro rail megaproject in India provides the case for the study. The strategies were identified through a content analysis of 640 project and non-project based Tweets posted by the metro rail organization. We augmented this dataset with the community's response through social media, as well as through semi-structured interviews that captured the project teams' responses. The findings indicate that the megaproject used various strategies: promoting the organization, giving progress updates, appealing to the community, as well as targeting of specific sections of the population. The effect of these attempts at governmentality through branding were observed in community discourses on social media platforms that echoed the strategic discourses projected by the megaproject while interviews enabled us to access the project team's responses. For the project community, the effects included a positive brand image, creating community brand advocates and building support for the project during contentious episodes. For the project team, the effects included job attraction, enhanced job perception as well as the creation of project team brand advocates. The relation between the governmentality instruments and their corresponding effects are theorized in six propositions.

@en

Megaprojects involve managing external stakeholders with diverse interests. Using an Indian megaproject case study, we discuss how the project managed external stakeholders through strategies such as: persuasion, deputation, give and take, extra work for stakeholders, and flexibility. Drawing from theories and frameworks of power, we explain how these strategies emerge through a process of tactical clustering. We also analyze the resources available to the project team—such as recruitment discretion, government backing, and fund discretion—that influence these power dynamics and enable these strategies. We posit that changes in the resource base can significantly affect strategic action and, in turn, megaproject outcomes.

@en

Recent studies of temporary organizing and project-based work explain how organizational actors establish and maintain clear role structures and harmonious relations in the face of precariousness by engaging in stabilizing work practices. This focus upon ‘order’ undervalues conflict-ridden negotiations and power struggles in temporary organizing. This paper demonstrates that in temporary organizing conflict and order may exist in tandem. Drawing close to the collaborative dynamics in a large-scale global project, we analyse the political struggles over role patterns and hierarchic positioning of client and agent in the temporary organization of the Panama Canal Expansion Program (PCEP). In such projects, the agent typically takes the position of project leader. In this case however, the client was formally in charge, while the agent was assigned the role of coach and mentor. The diffuse hierarchy triggered project partners to engage in both harmony-seeking social and discursive practices and to enter into conflict-ridden negotiations over authority relations in the everyday execution of the PCEP project. Our study contributes to existing literatures on temporal organizing by presenting a case of simultaneous practices of harmonization and contestation over mutual roles and hierarchic positions. We also show that studying collaboration between project partners involves, not merely analysing project governance structures, but also offering a context-sensitive account of everyday social and discursive practices. Finally, we reflect on a view of ‘permanence’ and ‘temporariness’ as themselves contested categories and symbolic sites for struggle.

@en

After a parliamentary enquiry into construction industry malpractice, changes occurred in collaborative practices between clients and contractors in megaprojects within the Dutch construction sector. The enquiry meant that both clients and contractors were forced to acknowledge illegal practices of collusion and fraud. For those engaged in public-private relationships, a process followed of attempting to change collaborative practices. Three interventions in collaborative practices are recounted: (1) organizing personal networks between clients and contractors; (2) a competitive dialogue procedure; and (3) the right of withdrawal. These three interventions helped to change first order practice, such as increasing mutual trust between client and contractor, supporting a mutual understanding of role positioning and dilemmas, and creating an understanding of the nature of the conflict but failed to change second order practices. Two contributions to the understanding of project management are provided. New empirical data are presented on the challenges that public and private partners face in their attempt to implement new collaborative practices. It is shown how power is entangled in the emerging of new collaborative practices. The findings are based on a longitudinal ethnographic study of public-private collaboration in the Dutch construction industry in the period 2006-11.

@en

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the role of intervention/oriented scientists in the process of organisation development. The paper seeks to contribute to the growing interest in design studies for organisation development and argues that a focus on reflexivity is missing in current debate. The aim of the paper to develop critical reflexiveness for organization design studies by introducing the ethnoventionist approach. Design/methodology/approach – The paper discusses the ideal forms of clinical inquiry, participative action research, ethnography, and the ethnoventionist approach. The ethnoventionist approach is described by its central aspects: a focus on reflexivity, a management (but not managerialist) orientation, commitment to obtaining a deep understanding, connecting the multi/layered context, and studying in pre/arranged longitudinal intervals. Findings – The ethnoventionist approach uses organisational ethnographies to facilitate intervention strategies intended to improve organisations. An example of such an approach in the design of new collaborative practices in the Dutch construction sector is drawn on. Practical implications – The essence of the ethnoventionist approach is to obtain a deeper understanding of organisational change. The ethnoventionist approach helps to overcome a lack of attention to management in current ethnographic bodies of knowledge and to deepen existing management approaches to change dynamics. Ethnoventionist approaches can be very useful for intervention/oriented studies of change processes which require high levels of engagement and which produce high/quality ethnographic data. Originality/value – This paper explores a new research approach that has not been discussed previously.

@en

Recent studies show that despite their growing popularity, megaprojects - large-scale, complex projects delivered through various partnerships between public and private organisations - often fail to meet costs estimations, time schedules and project outcomes and are motivated by vested interests which operate against the public interest. This paper presents a more benign and theoretically-grounded view on what goes wrong by comparing the project designs, daily practices, project cultures and management approaches of two recent megaprojects in The Netherlands and Australia, showing how these projects made sense of uncertainty, ambiguity and risk. We conclude that project design and project cultures play a role in determining how managers and partners cooperate to achieve project objectives to a greater or lesser extent.

@en