What is project governance and what are its origins?

Ahola, Tuomas; Ruuska, Inkeri; Artto, Karlos; Kujala, Jaakko

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.09.005

Cited by 187 publications

(190 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

178

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The scholarly study of project governance is said to be a 'fledging field' [Pitsis et al, (2014), p.1285] drawing on theoretical perspectives from other scholarly domains, including principalagent theory (Jensen and Meckling, 1976;Eisenhardt, 1989) examining the costs and contracts of separating ownership and control, transaction cost economics (Williamson, 1975) arguing that organisations select a governance structure that minimises the cost of transactions, shareholder theory (Friedman, 1962) focusing narrowly on maximising returns on investment for owners, stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984;Donaldson and Preston, 1995;Miles, 2015) considering the differing interests of a broad group of constituents, stewardship theory (Donaldson and Davis, 1991;Davis et al, 1997) emphasising trust between principals and managers, and resource dependence theory (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978) examining the power exerted by the external controllers of scarce resources. According to literature reviews and bibliometric analysis (Biesenthal and Wilden, 2014;Ahola et al 2014), the perspectives of principal-agent theory, stakeholder theory, and transaction cost economics are particularly prominent in the nascent literature on project governance. After drawing on some conceptual arguments from stakeholder theory and principal-agent theory in the next section, the remainder of this article departs from prior project governance research by drawing exclusively on game theory and on evidence and examples from the project management literature for model development and analysis.…”

Section: Model Development: the Project Manager -Project Sponsor Relamentioning

confidence: 99%

A game theory perspective on product development project charters: the project manager - project sponsor relationship as an iterated Prisoner's Dilemma

Muegge

2017

IJPOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The product development processes of many firms include a project charter -a document that formally authorises a product development project, establishes expectations and success criteria, and provides a project manager with authority and resources. Neither the project sponsors nor the project manager have complete and perfect knowledge; thus the project charter is the outcome of negotiation, estimation, and forecasting, by stakeholders with partially aligned and partially differing incentives -a situation that game theorists characterise as a 'mixed-motive game'. This article develops a conceptual game theory model of the project manager -project sponsor relationship, then draws on past research on analytic game theory, evolutionary game theory, and behavioural game theory to develop propositions about cooperation on project charters and implications for theory and practice. The model and propositions developed from the model contribute to our conceptual understanding of cooperation within product development organisations and the theoretical underpinnings of project management.

show abstract

Section: Model Development: the Project Manager -Project Sponsor Relamentioning

confidence: 99%

A game theory perspective on product development project charters: the project manager - project sponsor relationship as an iterated Prisoner's Dilemma

Muegge

2017

IJPOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…a hybrid of an analytical frame and a normative model. Ahola et al (2014) examine project governance literature and contrast it to general governance literature published outside the domain of project research. Based on their findings they argue that there exists considerable potential to further bridging of the project governance literature and general governance literature.…”

Section: Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on their findings they argue that there exists considerable potential to further bridging of the project governance literature and general governance literature. It is interesting to note that when comparing the references of Ahola et al (2014) with those of Renn et al (2011) and Hermans et al (2012) there is no overlap in the use of references to the broader, general notion of governance when, respectively, addressing the origins of project governance and risk governance.…”

Section: Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…PMBOK (2013) define project governance as "an oversight function that is aligned with the organization's governance model and that encompasses the project life-cycle [by providing] a comprehensive, consistent method of controlling the project and ensuring its success by defining and documenting and communicating reliable, repeatable project practices". However, the concept of project governance remains ambiguous in the project management field (Ahola et al, 2014).…”

Section: Governance In the Perspective Of Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analyzing safety strategies at the front-end of projects

Fossum¹,

Danielsen²,

Berg³

2016

Risk, Reliability and Safety: Innovating Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Project front-end definition is the process for conceptual development of projects that involve the development of sufficient strategic information on which project owners can address risk and make decisions to commit resources in order to maximize the potential for success. An up-front underestimation of costs might result in inferior projects being selected and thus affect the strategic performance of projects. Known causes for underestimation of costs include underestimating risk, overestimating opportunities, inadequate estimation methods and skills, reliance on weak information and strategic / deliberate scope creep. In this conceptual paper we identify common challenges in project and risk governance and argue how methodology used for project front-end definition can be applied toward these challenges. We further discuss how safety strategies in project based organizations should be analyzed in recognition of these challenges.

show abstract

“…The governance requirements that a business imposes upon its projects are subject to the influence, interests and knowledge of its key players. These may have different understandings of the various competing governance models and may even have different understandings of the same terminology (Ahola, Ruuska, Artto & Kujala 2014;Biesenthal & Wilden 2014;McGrath & Whitty 2013;Pitsis, Sankaran, Gudergan & Clegg 2014). Understanding of the term governance has been influenced by many people's views and perspectives or, in the words of Russell (2005, p. 642) "Kantian spectacles".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Redefining governance: from confusion to certainty and clarity

McGrath

Whitty

2015

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to resolve and remove from the governance arena in general and the project arena in particular, conflict which occurs when parties do not realise they have different meanings for common governance terms. Design/methodology/approach -Review literature on definitional confusion in general and on governance in particular and develop a method for defining an internally consistent group of terms, then apply this to a group of terms in the governance arena. Findings -Several important subjects commonly arranged under the governance banner do not actually constitute governance (strategy, behaviour, decision making). Research limitations/implications -Further work is necessary to remove similar confusion in other closely related areas, including power itself and authority as well as project and general management terms such as responsibility and accountability. Practical implications -Projects and business alike can potentially achieve significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness through gaining consistency across current models, frameworks, policies and procedures thus reducing cross-boundary conflict. Social implications -Creation of a unifying feature within the project and management literature, shifting the understanding of the boundaries and limitations of governance. These definitions will help progress governance from complexity to simplicity, from an art to an understandable practice, from a concept that has been hijacked for partisan and political gain to a lean social tool which can be put to use for the benefit of organisations, whether public, charitable or private. Originality/value -The value is clarity -resulting in the avoidance of confusion and misunderstanding together with their consequent waste of time, resources and money.

show abstract

What is project governance and what are its origins?

Cited by 187 publications

References 71 publications

A game theory perspective on product development project charters: the project manager - project sponsor relationship as an iterated Prisoner's Dilemma

A game theory perspective on product development project charters: the project manager - project sponsor relationship as an iterated Prisoner's Dilemma

Analyzing safety strategies at the front-end of projects

Redefining governance: from confusion to certainty and clarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About