Program group's discursive construction of context: A means to legitimize buck-passing

Practices of isolation: The shaping of project autonomy in innovation projects

“…The practices of isolation shape, through a dynamic interaction between temporary and parent organization, the autonomy of a project and its outcomes. We have illustrated and theorized how isolation occurs and relates to the integration and autonomy of temporary organizations Näsänen & Vanharanta, 2016 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ). Our study also corroborates earlier findings that implementing innovations through projects is difficult ( Bakker, 2010 ).…”

“…Furthermore, the study contributes to the project management literature focusing on the integration of projects in parent organizations ( Davies et al, 2014 ;Gemunden et al, 2005 ;Lundin et al, 2015 ;Prado & Sapsed, 2016 ). We give further insight into how temporary and permanent organizations interact and shape each other through a rich and empirically grounded analysis of practices of project isolation, as has been asked for recently Näsänen & Vanharanta, 2016 ;Sydow & Braun, 2018 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ). The practices of isolation shape, through a dynamic interaction between temporary and parent organization, the autonomy of a project and its outcomes.…”

“…This also shows why recent studies on integration and autonomy discuss this explicitly in the context of the temporarypermanent interface of projects (e.g. Näsänen & Vanharanta, 2016 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ), as this takes stock of the uniqueness of projects but also of problems related to their temporariness. It thus questions how boundaries between temporary and permanent organizations are managed and how this is contingent on contextual factors and the project's lifecycle.…”

“…Furthermore, the study contributes to the project management literature focusing on the integration of projects in parent organizations ( Davies et al, 2014 ;Gemunden, Salomo & Krieger, 2005 ;Lundin et al, 2015 ;Prado & Sapsed, 2016 ) by providing a rich and empirically grounded analysis of practices of project isolation. We illustrate and theorize how isolation occurs and how this relates to the integration and autonomy of temporary organizations Näsänen & Vanharanta, 2016 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ). Our paper thus advances our understanding of how temporary and permanent organizations interact, highlighting how project autonomy exists dynamically on a continuum between complete integration and complete isolation, and how practices of isolation relate to how projects deliver innovations.…”

“…Van Marrewijk (2017) shows how granted autonomy of a high-speed train megaproject slowly drifted into an ungranted form of spatial and social isolation, much to the dismay of the parent organization. While isolation thus seems a recurring theme for innovation projects, we do not know how it occurs and relates to the integration and autonomy of temporary organizations Näsänen & Vanharanta, 2016 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ). A more nuanced understanding of the process of autonomy and isolation provides insights into the interaction between temporary and permanent organizations and the integration of projects into parent organization, as has been asked for by recent studies ( Bakker et al, 2016 ;Geraldi & Söderlund, 2018 ;Sydow & Braun, 2018 ;Turkulainen et al, 2015 ;Vuorinen & Martinsuo, 2018 ).…”