Taking a Holistic Exploration of the Project Life Cycle in Public–Private Partnerships

Abstract

Operations and projects are typically treated as dichotomous concepts; projects create assets to be operated. The segregation of operations from projects is evidenced in the generic project life cycle (concept, feasibility, design, execute, and close) in which consideration of an operations stage is omitted. This article, however, suggests that this omission renders the generic project life cycle (PLC) unsuitable as a frame of reference for managing (and researching) long-term public infrastructure projects, in particular those delivered under the auspices of private participation in infrastructure initiatives such as public–private partnerships (PPPs). Drawing on the normative literature and the authors’ phenomenological research that is embedded in practice, this article demonstrates that operations are an inherent feature of PPP projects. Thus, the generic PLC model is inconsistent with the actuality of PPPs. Implications of this inconsistency for operations management and research of PPPs, particularly in relation to quality, risk, and human resource management are identified and discussed.

Talking About Futureproofing: Real Options Reasoning in Complex Infrastructure Projects

“…Shifting the focus from capital cost of the project to whole lifecycle cost of the estate, was identified as an enabling condition for futureproofing. Similar observations regarding the exclusion of operations from projects is evidenced in the generic project lifecycle (concept to execution and decommissioning), where the operations phase is largely omitted [55]. A Managing Director for a consulting firm explains the rationale in a PPP-type contract: "Now if they [main contractor] know that every 15 years within that 35-year period they are going to do two complete refreshments before the handover of the building, they will therefore look at the flexibility because… they are looking for the cheapest price over the whole life of the building!…”

Large-Scale Transport Infrastructure Project Performance: Generating a Narrative of Context and Meaning

“…1) long-term nature and the need to consider the operations phase, ranging anywhere between 15 and 30 years. Despite the significance of this phase of a PPP's life-cycle, research examining its performance has been limited [5], [16], [64], [65]. 2) focus on service outcomes to business and people rather than the creation of a physical asset, "which may or may not continue to serve the needs of stakeholders and the wider community over time" [92, p. 6].…”

Toward Life Cycle Sustainability in Infrastructure: The Role of Automation and Robotics in PPP Projects

“…Therefore, an open and transparent process in line with international standards and a competitive market with technologically skilled actors is required [26]. Upon awarding of the contract to a winning consortium, a special purpose vehicle (SPV) is set up as the joint platform for public and private stakeholders to realize the project [32]. The PPP's capital structures and financing terms are also determined in this stage.…”

“…The operation phase covers the longest period of a PPP project, connecting the public and private project actors with the asset's end-users. While often not considered part of a construction project, Alexander, Ackermann et al [32] advocate for seeing the operation phase as an integral part of PPPs. This may be contrary to existing contractor business models focusing on the creation of the asset rather than its operation.…”

“…After recovering the costs of the design and construction phase, the private SPV members lose interest in holding and maintaining the asset [23]. To ensure a high quality of the asset, the public entity must enforce effective service level agreements that define the remuneration and performance structures [32]. Potential approaches can be availability-based or revenue-based strategies.…”