Having received considerable attention from central government and local authorities, French innovation clusters (the so-called 'pôles de compétitivité') are beginning to be studied by academic researchers and evaluated by consultants. The core of their activity consists of collaborative projects, which are characterised by specific management and HR practices located at the junction of different cultures and employment statuses. Almost four years after they were launched, what can we say about the dynamic of these collaborative projects? What is the reality of such collaboration when it involves multiple partnerships bringing together employees from different occupational cultures and HRM systems? The aim of this longitudinal research, which is based on observation of two collaborative projects in one of the most largest clusters in France,is to discuss management and HR issues in such a setting. A literature review highlights the need to open up the 'black box' of collaboration within projects and encourages examination of both manager's coordination efforts and the actors' motivation to cooperate, as well as the role played by HRM practices. Thus observation of the conduct of the projects over two years reveals that collaboration, far from being a given within these projects, is the product of a process of social construction that might be fostered by better managerial support.

No abstract

Project-based working is so widespread today that Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello (1999) go so far as to regard the project-based 'mode of justification' as a component part of the new ideology of modern capitalism. This particular set of principles is applied in the legal, educational, psychological, political and managerial spheres, which confirms Jean Pierre Boutinet's vision (Boutinet 1990) of the project as a pervasive element of social life. The injunctions to make commitments and the promises of self-realisation purveyed by certain segments of the management literature have helped to create the myth of the good fortune to be gained from project-based work. The very vocabulary of project-based management seems laden with connotations: surpassing of oneself, reaching out beyond one's normal capacities, prevails over stress, leadership or coaching replaces authority and direction or guidance does duty for control. Employees working on projects become actors, a choice of language that emphasises the autonomy they are supposed to enjoy in order to get involved and bring projects to their conclusion. This 'managerially correct' discourse raises questions. It has something of the nature of an idealisation mechanism, as Jean Pierre Boutinet emphasises in the updated preface to his book 'Anthropologie du projet'. It seems to us, from the evidence provided by the project actors we have met, that certain collateral effects on human resources are produced; in particular, various forms of distress emerge for which no responsibility is really taken. This concern has to be set alongside the emergence of a professional and academic literature on distress at work, some of which has received considerable media attention (Dejours, 1998; Hirigoyen, 1998; Neveu, 1999). Companies are said to have placed too 3 much reliance on organisational innovations, without taking individuals into account. 'The nature of work has changed; it has become more fluid, flexible and reactive and, for many employees, certainly more interesting. However, the changes have also given rise to a new phenomenon: pressure. Various indicators show that work intensification and the resultant pressure are having a dangerously damaging effect on working conditions, with worrying increases in absenteeism, mental illness, occupational diseases, workplace accidents, even suicide and, to a different extent, alcoholism and drug addiction in the workplace' (Askenazy, in Impériali, 2005). Projects are not immune to these damaging effects-far from it. As a heightened form of professional activity, it exacerbates the problems experienced under normal conditions (Garel, Giard, Midler, 2004). It also poses specific problems, such as the 'mourning' associated with the end of an assignment (Dubouloy, in Asquin et alii, 2005).

Developing teams capable of completing projects in extreme situations is becoming a major challenge for a growing number of organizations. The notion of collective competence is increasingly being seen as a vital precondition for the success of project teams, particularly in extreme environments. However, we still know little about the ingredients of this collective competence. To partially fill this gap, we make use of the insights offered by the very particular world of the French Special Forces, which have been operating successfully for several decades in extreme environments. Based on an in‐depth qualitative study of their project‐based mode of operations, we detail the six main ingredients of the collective competence that underpins the activities of commando units in the field and insist upon the criticality of the pre‐ and postmission phases during which this collective competence is actively reinforced.

Defélix Christian et al., « La compétence collective dans le contexte de la globalisation du management : retrouver le lien avec la performance »,