No abstract

In this book, leading authorities on project organizing explore the growing deployment of projects and other types of temporary organizations, with a focus on the challenges created by projectification. The way projects are coordinated and handled influences the success of innovation and change within organizations and is critical for strategic development in our societies, yet it is often at odds with the institutions of traditional industrial society. Drawing on both theoretical perspectives and real-world cases, this book sheds light on the transformation toward a project society and explores the effects, opportunities, and conflicts it has created. As change continues, the authors make a case for renewing institutions and mind-sets and provide a foundation from which to discuss societal changes for the future. This is an invaluable book for researchers and students in project management and organizational theory programs, as well as professionals involved in the management of projects.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to establish an understanding of what projectification means, how projectification is driven forward, as well as what the consequences of projectification are in an European Union (EU) context, and in the public sector in general. Design/methodology/approach – The research methods consist of a literature review as well as a meta-analysis of key EU policy documents related to the functioning of regional development and projects. The paper shows that structural developments brought forth by a projectification in a public sector context have significant consequences. Findings – Without contextually sensitive interlinking mechanisms between temporary and permanent structures projects risk losing their flexible and innovative qualities, and may fragment the ability of permanent organisations for maintaining coordination and continuity. The findings suggests that the proximity of permanent organisations, the discretion of entrepreneurship, the political priority of the task, the inclusion of competencies and interests, and the quality of transfer mechanisms are essential variables in explaining the outcome of temporary organisations in a politico-administrative context. Research limitations/implications – The paper contributes to the literature on projects in a public sector context and suggests that comparative research on the drivers and consequences of public sector projectification in supranational as well as national contexts is needed. Practical implications – The increasing requirements for applied project management skills and methods as criteria for project selection in the public sector highlight the importance of a broader theoretical and practical understanding of projectification. Originality/value – The paper adds a new dimension to the projectification debate by presenting a descriptive and conceptual discussion about the consequences of public sector projectification in an EU context. It complements an existing theory of the temporary organisation and takes the first steps towards a theory applicable to projectification in a public context.

In Project Society, organizing by projects plays a prominent role. This type of society is already here, but projectification continues to lead developments and transformations along a set of paths and trajectories. One way to describe this trend is to say that there is societal organizing in which various types of projects are becoming even more prevalent and diverse. The projectification trend seems to be the result of a variety of mechanisms at work, where a wide set of traditional institutions—ranging from laws to mindsets—is constantly challenged and reformed. Managing, along with the nature of work, are changing and adapting.

Forward algorithms that solve successively longer finite horizon problems and that possess good stopping rules (such as a planning horizon) seem better suited to the needs of a manager facing a partial information environment than the more common procedure of selecting a horizon [0, T] in advance. In this light, the Wagner and Whitin forward algorithm with a planning horizon procedure for the dynamic lot size model goes far beyond computational savings. Building on additional results due to Zabel, we develop new planning horizon procedures and near planning horizon procedures. (A brief sketch of how to develop similar results for the production smoothing problem suggests that the basic methodology developed possesses some generality.) We present an extensive empirical study that reports that Wagner-Whitin planning horizons were found for a reasonably small subset of problems within 500 periods, while planning horizons, or at least near planning horizons, were found universally by the modified procedure. (The Zabel procedure was intermediate in power.) The number of periods until a “near” horizon seems to be given empirically by [Formula: see text] for the linear stationary case, where K is the setup cost, h the holding cost, and D the average demand rate. Extensions useful for a broad subset of the general concave cost case are also given.