Managing Complex Collaborative Projects: Lessons from the Development of a New Satellite

Abstract

This paper examines the case of a Complex Product System (CoPS)—a new satellite—and the combination of international firms and agencies that contributed to its development. Despite many political, organisational and interpersonal tensions, divergent objectives and strategic misjudgements, the satellite was successfully launched in 2002. It was found that a number of factors contributed to the successful conclusion of the project, including the evolution of organisational structures between different actors as the project progressed, the use of a range of innovation management tools accompanied by personnel with significant discretion and judgement, and a unifying methodology for satellite production called the Small Satellite Philosophy (SSP), which helped provide an approach for its effective integration. The paper describes the satellite project and the problems of technology transfer it confronted, then examines whether the solutions adopted could be appropriate for other complex innovative projects, particularly those involving joint public–private investments. It also describes the interaction between development time, mission cost, risk and return in reduced resource CoPS. Although the satellite itself was a technical success, government policy objectives for the project were not realised and the paper considers mismatches between policy objectives and mechanisms in complex projects. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006managing complexity, Complex Product Systems, innovation in Satellites, space industry, technology transfer, O032,

Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia

“…While CRCs have generated clear economic benefits (Insight Economics, 2006), these are geared towards larger-scale, longer-term arrangements that are suited to big research users, requiring extensive management. They have also been used inappropriately, for example in an abortive attempt to recreate the Australian space industry (Moody and Dodgson, 2005). Only 570 Australian firms have participated in CRCs.…”

How to orchestrate R&D networks? The role of orchestration subprocesses and collaborative practices over time

“…However, despite the number of scientific and magazine articles that indicate the difficulties involved in orchestrating actors and resources effectively, some R&D networks, such as the Australian Fedsat microsatellite developed by the Cooperative Research Center (CRC) for Satellite Systems (CRCSS), achieve success. This network harnessed and further developed the expertise and resources of Australian universities, commercial organizations and government bodies (Moody & Dodgson, ). Complex R&D networks, such as Fedsat, are developed by a set of organizations with a variety of resources that can offer specific contributions in different phases of the project.…”

Evaluation of Knowledge Flow from Developed to Developing Countries in Small Satellite Collaborative Projects: The Case of Algeria

“…Consequently, a CoPS framework has been used to analyse satellite projects. Moody and Dodgson [29] draw heavily on the CoPS approach to analyse a small satellite collaborative project in Australia. Wood [30, p.78] considers the managerial challenges related to a CoPS project in exploring technological capability-building within satellite programmes in developing countries.…”