PurposeCitizen engagement can promote value creation in urban development projects. This potential stems from the granting of decision-making authority to citizens, labeled citizen enfranchisement in this study. Citizens are focal stakeholders of urban development projects and enfranchisement grants them an explicit say on such projects. Despite this potential for enhanced value creation, there remains limited understanding about how project organizations enfranchise stakeholders in the front end of urban development projects.Design/methodology/approachIn this research, we designed a multiple-case study to analyze two novel citizen engagement processes in Northern-European cities. In these processes, citizens were enfranchised in ideating, designing, and making selections on urban development projects. We followed a multimethod approach to data collection. The collected datasets include document data, interview data and observation data.FindingsOur findings demonstrated a distribution and redistribution of decision-making authority throughout the phases of the citizen engagement processes. Citizens’ voices were amplified throughout the project front end, although episodes of decision-making authority held by the cities took place periodically as well. By granting explicit decision-making authority to citizens, citizen enfranchisement facilitated a more democratic urban development process, promoting value creation.Originality/valueIn contrast to the earlier research, the findings of our study illustrate citizen engagement taking place at so-called higher levels of stakeholder engagement. In particular, our study reveals a granting of de facto decision-making authority to citizens, also known as citizen enfranchisement. These findings contribute to the earlier research on stakeholder engagement in projects, where the influence of stakeholder engagement has often been considered symbolic or limited.

PurposeVariations of human-versus-structure and within-humans at the organizational and the project level are critical in shaping the internal arrangement for effectiveness of project-based organization’s (PBOs) governance. Recent discourse presents governmentality at the organizational level and leadership at the project level as human agency of governance, whereas governance structures to be their counterpart. However, project-level mechanisms of governmentality that can help to understand possible variations among these governance dimensions remained veiled. This study uses institutional theory to explore these internal arrangements accommodated by variations of PBOs governance dimensions at the project level.Design/methodology/approachThe study followed Eisenhardt protocols of multiple case study design using an abductive research approach. Considering the heterogeneity of governance as a phenomenon in literature, boundary conditions were established before theorizing the model of the study to avoid ambiguities and define the research scope. Five PBOs were chosen using theoretical sampling, yielding 70 interviews. Data were analyzed by constant comparison with theory, using replication logic and cross-case analysis.FindingsFindings revealed that project managers perform a buffer function for governmentality at the project level. Identified mechanisms of governmentality at the project level included two downward mechanisms, i.e. communication and informal interactions of governors, and two upward mechanisms of adaptation and reciprocity by project managers and project team members. Cross-analysis for variations among PBOs’ governance at the project level revealed seven arrangements showcasing synergies or contrasts.Originality/valueThe study adds to organizational project management literature by advancing the significance of congruence between humans and structures in project governance. Furthermore, the synchronization of the project manager’s leadership style with the governmentality approach and governance structure of PBOs is of crucial importance at the project level. Findings suggest the same by showcasing synergetic versus contrasting internal arrangements accommodated in varying PBOs governance dimensions. Implications highlight that synergies among PBOs governance dimensions and project manager’s styles can minimize conflicts and inconsistencies in governance implementation, whereas contrasts might trigger them.

PurposeThis paper explores how risks are managed in project practice beyond formalized risk management processes by applying the lens of actuality research to project risk management.Design/methodology/approachThe paper follows a qualitative multimethod research approach utilizing literature review, interviews, observations and document analysis. The paper is based on three case studies and one interview study in project organizations facing green transition challenges.FindingsLittle work exists to reveal how risk management is actually done by project practitioners, and why. Few studies report on contextual variation and consider confounding factors beyond a “one size fits all” formalized explicit risk management process, despite ample evidence that risks are managed outside the formal process. The study documents that informal and/or implicit risk management activities add significantly more value.Originality/valueThe paper contributes a literature review of research into the actuality of project risk management, a sense-making framework of how risks are managed in practice beyond the formal, explicit risk-management process by including informal and/or implicit risk management activities, an empirical study of risk-management practice highlighting that informal and/or implicit risk-management activities dominate in practice, a discussion of why risks are managed outside formalized, explicit process and a research agenda to enable the design of impactful project risk-management practices.

PurposeKnowledge production in project studies is continuously challenged to combine scientific rigour and practical relevance, and a professional graduate programme in Project Management is a suitable environment for addressing this issue. This research aims to generate a framework of the Ecosystem of a University Research Centre in Project Studies (URC-PS) to enhance the benefits of research developed in a professional graduate programme.Design/methodology/approachThe research was developed under the paradigm of Design Science and operationalised through a method of Design Science Research. The prescriptive approach was used to identify, design, develop, demonstrate, and evaluate the framework.FindingsThe framework comprises four macro-elements: Project Studies; Impact Generation Process; Circumstances, Governance and Management; and Context, broken into sixty elements. It provides a structure that is simultaneously holistic, integrative, and procedural. It also develops a perspective of knowledge co-creation between academics and practitioners in an engaged scholarship approach.Practical implicationsThe framework provides a more thorough understanding of the ecosystem university management to the research centre itself, to engaged academics, and to external actors, which allows them to discuss, plan, execute, and evaluate the co-creation of knowledge in Project Studies.Originality/valueThe framework contributes to Organisational Knowledge Creation Theory by including and discussing outcomes and impacts from co-created knowledge in a URC-Project Studies environment. It also explores the concept of “Ba” in its proposal for structuring, organising, and operationalising the “Ba”.

PurposeThis research fills a gap in digitalization project studies by exploring them through the lens of organizational learning. It investigates the impact of uncertainty on digitalization project success and the role of absorptive capacity.Design/methodology/approachA mixed-methods approach is adopted, incorporating qualitative and quantitative analyses. The qualitative part assesses how uncertainty affects digitalization project success, while the quantitative side explores absorptive capacity as a mediating factor between adaptability to uncertainty and project success.FindingsThe qualitative results uncover challenges facing digitalization projects under uncertainty and suggests coping strategies at individual, project, and organizational levels. Quantitative results show that both potential and realized absorptive capacities significantly mediate the link between adaptability to uncertainty in the environment and project success.Originality/valueThis research offers new insights into digitalization project studies, merging organizational learning theory with a mixed-methods approach. It highlights how uncertainty and absorptive capacity influence digitalization project success.

PurposeThe aim of this research is to explore how a programmatic multi-project context influences project-based firms (PBFs) in organizing their relations with other PBFs and suppliers in a project-based industry.Design/methodology/approachA multiple case study research is conducted. Data are collected from two case studies in the construction infrastructure sector. Eleven interviews with contractors and other suppliers are the primary source of data collection. The data are complemented by procurement documents and expert consultations.FindingsThe findings show that within a programmatic multi-project context, PBFs settle relations with (1) key partners for program management capacity, PBFs establish relations with (2) main contractors to divide projects and (innovation) tasks, and PBFs intensify relations with (3) suppliers to ensure continuity and expertise.Research limitations/implicationsThe study contributes to the body of project management literature by exploring PBF’s relations with other PBFs and suppliers in a multi-project context. Based on empirical data, the study provides a distinction in layers presenting distinct levels of PBF’s supplier relations. This layer structure provides an excellent starting point for future studies exploring the program perspective of PBFs in the integrated supply chain.Originality/valueGiven the increase in programmatic multi-project context for project-based domains, discussed in both literature and practice, this study explores the effect of programs on relations of PBFs with other PBFs and suppliers. The study distinguishes PBF’s relations with the different suppliers in three layers and discusses the characteristics of these relations.

PurposeThe study examines the project success factors for leadership behavioural practices and communication impacting project success, providing empirical evidence to address the challenges in the digitalized environment in the Australian construction sector.Design/methodology/approachA quantitative approach was employed to collect survey data from 109 project managers and followers (project engineers, supervisors, team members, and senior managers) with diverse project management experience in the construction sector. An exploratory factors analysis/multivariate regression/relative importance index/t-test was used to identify the key project success factors and validate the study's results.FindingsData analysis identified four key project success factors: (1) Relationship Management, (2) Leading by Example, (3) Self-Management, and (4) Effective Communication, along with seventeen “behavioural practices attributes” impacting project success positively and significantly and emphasizing inclusiveness, relationship building, self-feedback objectivity, sharing information, collaboratively resolving disputes, and controlling emotions that significantly impact project success.Practical implicationsThe study's results will address the industry's challenges in the complex digitalized environment and specific issues experienced in the construction industry: delays and inefficiencies, supply chain management, communication barriers with multicultural workforce and safety protocols implementation, regulatory and safety compliance, infrastructure demands, skills shortages, sustainability, and new technology adoption to achieve project success.Originality/valueThe quantification of research findings, employing an innovative approach, underscores the distinctive nature of this study. The key success factors will help formulate innovative practices using stakeholder analysis, communication plans, conflict resolution strategies, promoting collaboration, safety leadership, providing cultural awareness, and enhancing the decision-making process to face challenges in the construction sector.

PurposeMegaprojects can play a crucial role in achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and tackling Global Challenges. However, they are often criticized for their massive resource consumption, poor cost/time performance and significant social-environmental impacts, including irreversible environmental damage. This study aims to chart the evolution of research on megaprojects sustainability and to offer a roadmap for future developments.Design/methodology/approachThis study adopted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify emerging themes and gaps. This study follows a three-step process of planning, conducting and reporting, based on the Tranfield approach. The overview of megaprojects sustainability research was captured through bibliometric analysis. In addition, content analysis was carried out to reveal the development of this field and get an insight into the future directions towards sustainability transition.FindingsThis study provides a longitudinal, in-depth analysis of megaprojects sustainability studies. Drawing on sustainability science and project management theories, we introduce a three-dimensional analytical framework consisting of sustainability, scope and stakeholder. This framework explains the evolution of megaprojects sustainability research from sustainability of megaprojects, to sustainability for megaprojects and then to sustainability by megaprojects. Three future avenues are proposed: (1) SDGs orientation at multi-level; (2) scope enlargement at temporal and spatial scales and (3) inclusive development for stakeholders.Originality/valueThis research contributes to the literature by providing a comprehensive and forward-looking analysis of megaprojects sustainability research. The framework and three research agendas provide a comprehensive picture of megaproject sustainability research; the agenda for future research is intended to inspire more studies and disruptive actions towards sustainability transition.

PurposeAntagonistic relationship among the participants of construction projects has significantly improved, and further improving cooperation quality are committed. In this context, expanding new ways to improve cooperation quality has become a new topic in cooperation research. This study is dedicated to exploring the mechanism of cross-organizational private relationships on cooperative behaviors, which is rarely addressed in current research on construction projects, and provides reference for the rational use of cross-organizational private relationships.Design/methodology/approachBased on analysis of studies related to relational governance theory, institutional theory and project complexity, this study constructs the theoretical model. This study uses survey data from 395 construction professionals in China to test the theoretical model by using structural equation modeling (SEM) and explains the direct and indirect mechanism of cross-organizational private relationships on cooperation behavior.Findings(1) Cross-organizational private relationships have direct and indirect facilitating effect on cooperation behavior. (2) Relational norms as mediating variables contribute to the expansion of the positive effects of cross-organizational private relationships on cooperation behavior. (3) Institutional environment and project complexity have the moderating effect between cross-organizational private relationships and cooperation behavior.Originality/valueThis research investigates the impact mechanisms and boundary conditions of cross-organizational private relationships at the micro level on the cooperative behaviors in construction projects and conducts empirical research. It is a topic that has not been adequately researched in the field of project management. The research results expand the scope of research on relational governance and deepen the research on the antecedents of relational norms. It provides the base for the proposed contingency theory of relational governance.