Dr. Maria Kapsali

Research Associate

Relating in project networks and innovation systemsResearch theme F - Projects,

Networks and Ecologies

Relating in theoryThe findings

Main finding: systemic relations were dominated by controlling-evaluation processes, which inhibited flexibility in managerial decision making and action. The three main findings were:

Leader’s role was

weakened –

sponsor boundary

management

takes precedence

Focus on policy-

project boundary

management

Policy implementation

instruments confine

managerial action and

choice in hard-closed

boundaries 1. First, that the management of operational change in project activities was not effective

3. Third, the level of openness to other boundary relationships within the projects networks were low...

Managing

operational

change was

weak

2. Second, the management of internal relationships-coordination within the project group was weak..

Implementation

design:

evaluation

instruments

Task

requirements little

flexibility no

change slack

Relational stability vs operational flexibility

Tension between the Boundary and the

Project Manager roles

Implementation instruments:

Top-down rigorous controls

on management process

(efficiency)

Manage operational change

Relations in their networks

Leadership – internal relations

Strategic Goal

Misalignment

The causal flowchart tracing the causality in the relational ties between policy-project in the EU innovation system.A detailed relational map of the interactive dynamics between policy and projects.

Problem:

• Systemic relations are not defined and

conceptualized in both project and

Innovation Systems literatures

• We need to map the dynamic

interactions and their causality in

Innovation Systems relating

Question: WHY TO STUDY THIS?

• Because the lack of explanation of the

dynamic interactions between actors in

an Innovation System severely limits us

from designing effective policy

implementation instruments

Question: HOW TO STUDY THIS?

• By creating a blueprint – relational map

to describe the dynamic interaction

between policy implementation and

projects in an Innovation System

• To show causality in this dynamic

interaction

The results

• 14 EU FP5 eTEN and ISTs healthcare technology projects.

Boundary Management

Project manager focuses on stage management

The role is that of ambassador and scout instead of task coordinator and guard

Cannot negotiate much + Participation rules – project manager ends up doing admin work

The Project Manager cannot buffer his team and is too busy to bring up boundaries

Instead the project manager is adjusting measurement Systems and aligning with agendas

POLICY FOCUS: DEPLOYMENT OF NEWPolicy instruments

Tensions in the BoundaryParticipation rules Transnational collaboration – Validation of

markets or deployment in markets through a venture

Deployment objective lost in evaluations Negotiation is mainly budget cutting Evaluation procedures not set up to deal with

project change Institutional void Lack of infrastructural cohesion

Implementation rationale →Continuous and systematic controlling through

monitoring –measurement procedures and participation rules

Project Management Tasks Planning: formal, Work Breakdown packages Communication: formal through the Policy-project boundary and distant working with partners Task control and coordination: Low

Operational Change The boundary role dominates the inner- boundary-leader role of the project manager Managing relations becomes the main project manager activity, the Project Manager is marginalized and loses control over participant’s focus and tasks

Project

Literature says:

Two types of literature: Triple

Helix (in Innovation Systems)

and project networks.

In the Triple Helix the boundaries

of the actors blur and fuse,

there is migration of production

activities and role substitution

that leads to changes in the

actors’ internal roles and

activities

This leads to mixed ways of

organizing and change in the

structures of actors

The project networks theory

advocates that project

networks are temporary,

dominated by a variety of

logics, identities, values and

loyalties that create

ecologies with different

nodes of transacting

Their linkages are fluid and

network structures defined

by project activities,

dynamic interactions and

institutional dependencies

Tension between relational

flexibility and operational

stability – operations need

to be more flexible for

relations to be more stable

(standardize expectations

and create swift trust) to

solve the problem of

institutional embeddedness

Project management

methodologies are designed

to make project processes

and activities predictable tl

be managed in a

reductionist way