Reframing Systems Integration: A Process Perspective on Projects

Abstract

The delivery of large-scale technical systems is achieved through project organizing. The concept of systems integration, with its distinct focus on the systems that projects deliver, is theoretically important as projects become more complex and face significant uncertainty. We reframe systems integration in interorganizational projects as a flexible and adaptive process of making constituent parts of systems work together. This process involves boundary-spanning structures and activities to address emergent complexity and uncertainty (that are both technological and organizational in nature). We discuss implications and highlight areas for further research on projects.

Exploring pattern of complexity in mega construction projects

“…First of all, considering that complexity emerges over time due to interactions between several dimensions (e.g., technological, organisational, financial), management of these dimensions should not be considered static and distinct tasks. This coincides with the argument of Whyte and Davies (2021) on the necessity of reframing systems integration by moving beyond a static approach to consider the emergence of complexity across technological and organisational boundaries. While some complexity factors, such as the high number of stakeholders and operational complexity, can be managed by deliberate strategies (exploitation), uncertainty and ambiguity due to interrelated factors require emergent strategies (exploration).…”

Multilevel network interventions: Goals, actions, and outcomes

“… Many organizations work on projects, and entire economies are becoming at least partially “projectified” ( Lundin and Söderholm, 1998 ). Projects have been theorized as interventions in wider systems such as in the functioning of a city, its infrastructure, or the health of its natural environment ( Whyte and Davies, 2021 ). As opposed to “business as usual”, projects have a beginning and an end and are designed to shift the targeted system from one state to another.…”

Defining integration capability dimensions and creating a corresponding self-assessment model for inter-organizational projects

“…Reducing life-cycle costs by integrating planning, construction, and operations (Kleiss and Imura, 2006) Standardized processes as a part of system integration and meta-system integration (Davies and Mackenzie, 2014) Systems integration focusing on the systems that projects deliver, and on the contexts of use (Whyte and Davies, 2021) Improved safety by integrating design and construction through communication and cooperation, and a positive relationship (Atkinson and Westall, 2010) Knowledge integration and activity coordination simultaneously influence the project execution (Klessova et al, 2020) A choice of project control modes improves knowledge integration (Lin et al, 2019) Project stakeholder management Stakeholder boundary action as a renewal initiative (Gustavsson and Gohary, 2012) Early involvement and assessment of stakeholders as a cornerstone for creating integrated teams (Aapaoja et al, 2013) A network perspective strategy and consideration given to project relationships (Ndoni and Elhag, 2010) Early involvement of participants and coordination are key to integrating design and construction (Austin et al, 2002) Improved risk management through understanding stakeholders' socio-cultural context (Dyer, 2017) Continuous adjustment of legislative framework (Kleiss and Imura, 2006) Stakeholder management as a part of meta-system integration (Davies and Mackenzie, 2014)…”