The Institutional Field Of Learning From Project-Related Failures – Opportunities and Challenges.
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Learning from past project failures presents opportunities for firms working within the construction sector to ‘build back wiser’ because, if lessons from these experiences are absorbed, they offer benefits such as mitigation against future failures, and enable the development of resilient project teams. However, instead of using sector-wide perspectives for organisational learning, Project-Based Organisation (PBOs) typically implement internal technological and strategic mechanisms in both learning and project management. Additionally, little attention is given to the institutional context within the sector. Hence, this study focuses on how learning within a PBO is influenced by the external environment by adopting an Institutional theory perspective. Via exploratory research, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 19 UK construction industry professionals and then analysed using thematic analysis. Findings reveal that there exists an institutional field of learning within which PBOs operate based on interactions with their external environment. These include: regulatory pillar-related organisations – such as government bodies, and regulatory bodies (e.g., the Health and Safety Executive); Normative pillar-related organisations (professional bodies such as APM and CIOB), and; cultural-cognitive pillar-related organisations (such as peer PBOs, suppliers and the wider supply chain). The study contends that each of these pillars offer lessons for the sector. Findings further reveal that cross organisational learning is hampered mostly by competition and fragmentation. Hence, to ‘build back wiser’ it is important that the sector brings together the identified institutional field members to better learn from project-related failures. Thus, PBOs need to build better institutional networks by viewing other organisations within the institutional field as sources of knowledge and embracing collaboration instead of competition.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Open Access Citation Advantage Service). Where authors include such a work in an institutional repository or on their website (ie. a copy of a work which has been published in a UTS ePRESS journal, or a pre-print or post-print version of that work), we request that they include a statement that acknowledges the UTS ePRESS publication including the name of the journal, the volume number and a web-link to the journal item.
d) Authors should be aware that the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License permits readers to share (copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the work) for any purpose, even commercially, provided they also give appropriate credit to the work, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. They may do these things in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests you or your publisher endorses their use.
References
Barnett, R. (1994) The Limits of Competence. Bristol: Open University Press.
Bresnen, M. (2016) ‘Institutional development, divergence and change in the discipline of project management’, International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), pp. 328–338.
Bryman, A. (2012) Social Research Methods. 4th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chiponde, D. B., Gledson, B. and Greenwood, D. (2022) ‘Organisational learning from failure and the needs-based hierarchy of project- based organisations’, Frontiers in Engineering and Built Environment, 2022(March 12), pp. 1–12. doi: 10.1108/FEBE-10-2021-0051.
Dille, T. and Söderlund, J. (2011) ‘Managing inter-institutional projects: The significance of isochronism, timing norms and temporal misfits’, International Journal of Project Management, 29(4), pp. 480–490.
DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1983) ‘The Iron Cage Revisited : Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.’, American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–160.
Edmondson, A. C. (2004) ‘Learning from failure in health care: Frequent opportunities, pervasive barriers’, Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(SUPPL. 2), pp. 3–9. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2003.009597.
Eggleton, D. (2021) ‘Knowledge is Power’, Project - Association for Project Management, pp. 50–52.
Engwall, M. (2003) ‘No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context’, Research Policy, 32(2003), pp. 789–808.
Faulconbridge, J. and Muzio, D. (2021) ‘Field Partitioning: The Emergence, Development and Consolidation of Subfields’, Organization Studies, 42(7), pp. 1053–1083. doi: 10.1177/0170840619855745.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2022) Heuristics for Masterbuilders: Fast and Frugal Ways to Become a Better Project Leader, Said Business School Working Paper. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4159984.
Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R. and Hinings, C. R. (2002) ‘Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields’, Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), pp. 58–80. doi: 10.2307/3069285.
Grunberg, J. and Pallas, J. (2009) ‘Barbarians at the gates? Organizations protecting and promoting their (non)technical cores through institutional boundary-spanning’, in Wedlin, L., Sahlin, K., and Grafsrom, M. (eds) Exploring the Worlds of Mercury and Minerva: Essays for Lars Engwall. Uppsala: Uppsala Univeristy Press, pp. 1–18.
Hartmann, A. and Dorée, A. (2015) ‘Learning between projects: More than sending messages in bottles’, International Journal of Project Management, 33(2015), pp. 341–351. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.006.
Jugdev, K. and Muller, R. (2005) ‘A Retrospective Look at Our Evolving Understanding of Project Success’, Project Management Journal, 36(4), pp. 19–31.
Kortantamer, D., Kalra, J. and Vine, R. (2021) Rethinking capabilities: lessons for policy, scholarship and practice. London.
Latham, M. (1994) Constructing The Team: Joint Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the United Kingdom Construction Industry. Final Report. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Levinthal, D. A. and March, J. G. (1993) ‘The myopia of learning’, Strategic Management Journal, 14(2 S), pp. 95–112. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250141009.
Levitt, R. E. and Scott, W. R. (2016) ‘Global projects: Institutional and political challenges’, in Flyvbjerg, B. (ed.) Global Projects: Institutional and Political Challenges. Oxford University Press, pp. 1–23.
Macpherson, A. and Clark, B. (2009) ‘Islands of Practice : Conflict and a Lack of “Community” in Situated Learning’, Management Learning, 40(5), pp. 1350–5076. doi: 10.1177/1350507609340810.
Madsen, P. M. and Desai, V. (2018) ‘No firm is an Island: The role of population-level actors in organizational learning from failure’, Organization Science, 29(4), pp. 739–753. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1199.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D. and Guassora, A. D. (2016) ‘Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power’, Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), pp. 1753–1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444.
Morris, P. W. G. and Geraldi, J. (2011) ‘Managing the Institutional Context for Projects’, Project Management Journal, 42(6), pp. 20–32. doi: 10.1002/pmj.
Müller, R. and Jugdev, K. (2012) ‘Critical success factors in projects: Pinto, Slevin, and Prescott – the elucidation of project success’, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(4), pp. 757–775.
Newell, S. and Edelman, L. F. (2008) ‘Developing a dynamic project learning and cross-project learning capability: Synthesizing two perspectives’, Information Systems Journal, 18(6), pp. 567–591. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00242.x.
Oliver, D. G., Serovich, J. M. and Mason, T. L. (2005) ‘Constraints and Opportunities with Interview Transcription: Towards Reflection in Qualitative Research’, Social Forces, 84(2), pp. 1273–1289.
Perkman, M. (2017) ‘How boundary organizations facilitate collaboration across diverse communities’, in Tell, F. et al. (eds) Managing Knowledge Integration Across Boundaries. Oxford: Managing Knowledge Integration Across Boundaries, pp. 155–170. doi: 10.1093/acprof.
Ringel, L., Hiller, P. and Zietsma, C. (2018) ‘Toward permeable boundaries of organizations?’, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 57(October), pp. 3–28. doi: 10.1108/S0733-558X20180000057001.
Sage, D. J., Dainty, A. R. J. and Brookes, N. J. (2010) ‘Who reads the project file? Exploring the power effects of knowledge tools in construction project management’, Construction Management and Economics, 28(6), pp. 629–639.
Saunders, M., Philip, L. and Thornhill, A. (2009) Research Methods for Business Students. 5th edn. London: Prentice Hall.
Scholten, K., Pamela, S. S. and Fynes, B. (2019) ‘Building routines for non-routine events: supply chain resilience learning mechanisms and their antecedents’, Supply Chain Management, 24(3), pp. 430–442. doi: 10.1108/SCM-05-2018-0186.
Sense, A. J. (2007) ‘Stimulating situated learning within projects: personalizing the flow of knowledge.’, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 5(1), pp. 13–21. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500124.
Stjerne, I. S., Söderlund, J. and Minbaeva, D. (2019) ‘Crossing times: Temporal boundary-spanning practices in interorganizational projects’, International Journal of Project Management, 37(2), pp. 347–365. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.09.004.
Wei, Y. and Miraglia, S. (2017) ‘Organizational culture and knowledge transfer in project-based organizations: Theoretical insights from a Chinese construction firm’, International Journal of Project Management, 35(4), pp. 571–585. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.02.010.