Programming for holistic value creation: collaboration, coordination and perception

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to holistically explore value creation approaches in a program of cultural projects to inform the practices of project/program management in both public and private sectors. Design/methodology/approach The paper brings together the literature on project, program and portfolio value creation to inform a case study conducted with engaged scholarship research methods. Findings Three themes of value creation are revealed: managing collaboration, coordination and perception. Effectuation and causation are both observed, demonstrating that a combination of logics underpin decision making in projects. Research limitations/implications The results are based on a single case in a cultural context. Further research is needed to determine whether the observed value creation themes apply more generally, and to explore more deeply the use of logics associated with entrepreneurship in project decision making. Practical implications The study reveals several non-commercial aspects of value creation that may play a role across a range of project environments. Practitioners may be able to recognize a wider range of value creation and to better nurture these previously unacknowledged types of value. Originality/value The study provides new insights on value and decision logic through in-depth analysis of value creation in a program of culture projects.

Hyper-project portfolio management: post-merger project portfolios

“…, 2017; Lappi et al. , 2019; Laursen and Killen, 2019; Nogeste, 2010; Veiga and Franco, 2015; Zhu et al. , 2020).…”

“…In the literature, the CURV has been handled individually or sometimes as subsets (Martinsuo, 2020;Teller et al, 2014;Williams, 2017). and Killen, 2019;Nogeste, 2010;Veiga and Franco, 2015;Zhu et al, 2020). Many aspects of PMI are impacted not only by cultural differences and sociocultural status (Sales et al, 2022;Schlindwein and Geppert, 2020) but also by the emotional dimensions of managers and employees, which play a crucial role in the process (Fiorentino and Garzella, 2015;Al Hosani et al, 2020;Khan et al, 2020;Kroon and Noorderhaven, 2018;Kroon and Reif, 2023;Safavi, 2021;Thelisson and Meier, 2022).…”

“…They presented a reproducible method for various project sets at the front-end phase and revisited the definition of the CURV term as follows:As a human factor, synergy helps establish holistic values and requires organizational collaboration and coordination. Various authors mentioned that different skill sets and alliance mechanisms require for establishments(Anh Vũ et al, 2009;Castiglioni and Gal an Gonz alez, 2020;Golonka and Latusek, 2016;Hietaj€ arvi et al, 2017;Lappi et al, 2019;Laursen…”

Untitled

“…The significance of knowledge and innovation management (C11) has been highlighted by several authors (Rijke et al, 2014;Laursen, Killen, 2019). Pellegrinelli et al (2015) observed that when a program is not only a coordinating tool for independent projects, but also an organizational mechanism for achieving the main strategic goal or change, its component projects should be managed with utmost care to ensure efficient implementation and utilization of existing knowledge.…”

Seven Decades of Project Portfolio Management Research (1950–2019) and Perspectives for the Future

“…Managing value creation in portfolios appears to be a fruitful path for PPM research (Laursen & Svejvig, 2016), as the notion of PPM value and success has gradually changed focus from being project- and product-centric toward being value-centric (Ang & Biesenthal, 2017). As we expand our understanding of value and success (Laursen & Killen, 2019), we become better at assisting organizations in establishing a more strategic orientation to their external and internal organizational environments (Martinsuo & Geraldi, 2020).…”