Why Do Business Organizations Participate in Projects? Toward a Typology of Project Value Domains

Abstract

Project scholarship suggests that an increasing volume of activities in organizations, economies, and societies occurs in the form of temporary projects. Drawing on research on project value, we aim to build a contextual understanding of why business organizations choose to participate in projects. Discussing value creation, capture, and destruction patterns for the owner, project-based firm, and the temporary project domains of project organizing, we develop a typology of project value domains for business organizations. We contribute to the theory and debate in project studies, integrating the conversations on the projectification of economies and societies with the stream of work on project value.

The Temporality of Project Success: Vindeby, the World’s First Offshore Wind Farm

“…As our second main contribution, we propose the through-time perspective of project success, adding to the in-time (e.g., Chang et al, 2013; Ligthart et al, 2016; McLeod et al, 2012; Stjerne & Svejenova, 2016; van Marrewijk, 2017; Zerjav, 2021) and over-time (e.g., de Wit, 1988; Meredith & Zwikael, 2019; Sabini et al, 2019) perspectives adopted by extant literature on project success. The through-time perspective captures the connections through time between the temporal construction of project success of the project as future, the project as present, and the project as past, as revealed by our findings.…”

“…Prior studies adopting an in-time perspective show how actors socially construct project success during specific periods of time or at specific points in time (e.g., Chang et al, 2013; Ligthart et al, 2016; McLeod et al, 2012; Stjerne & Svejenova, 2016; van Marrewijk, 2017; Zerjav, 2021). As the project progresses, the involved set of internal and external stakeholders and their respective evaluations may change (Chang et al, 2013; McLeod et al, 2012), suggesting the need to consider “project success as an ongoing and long term (emergent) process” (Zerjav, 2021, p. 292). Thus, from the in-time perspective, project success is an emergent, only temporarily stabilized outcome.…”

Designing the transition to operations in large inter‐organizational projects: Strategy, structure, process, and people

“…Of all the aforementioned organizational design research on transitions, there are four main areas most relevant to this study and which provide the theoretical framework for the discussion of our findings. Related studies of the strong owner provide strategies for organizational design (Merrow, 2011; Morris & Hough, 1987; Winch & Leiringer, 2016; Zerjav, 2021). In this study, a strong owner is defined as one who has in‐house project management capabilities, but is also able to think strategically and bring an operational mindset to the project (Morris, 2013; Winch & Leiringer, 2016).…”

“…While projects have traditionally been seen as vehicles for delivering specific outputs for a predefined scope, they are now increasingly being conceptualized as tools for value creation (Browning, 2010; Laursen & Svejvig, 2016). Projects unlock value and realize investment in long‐term operational outcomes by delivering project outputs (Morgan et al, 2008; Zerjav, 2021). Without a successful transition in transforming project outputs into operational outcomes, the resources spent on projects might be wasted, as changes must be made to suit the requirements or preferences of the organizations operating the asset (Locatelli et al, 2020; Morgan et al, 2008).…”

Network Governance for Interorganizational Temporary Organizations: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda

“…Interorganizational projects suffer from multiple tensions, including the temporary and permanent paradox and the individual and collective identity paradox (Zerjav, 2021). The former relates to an ongoing debate on the extent to which project organizations should be decoupled from or embedded in their broader organizational context (DeFillippi & Sydow, 2016).…”