Possible research themes & approaches of interest, based on thoughts that the SpeedUp plan raised

Transcription

1 Possible research themes & approaches of interest, based on thoughts that the SpeedUp plan raised Karlos Artto & Tuomas Ahola Aalto University SpeedUp Workshop 28th & 29th April 2014 Trondheim, Norway) Project Business research group at Aalto University, Finland

2 Economic history research: development paths in industry project delivery times in Finnish shipbuilding industry Industry evolution Discontinuous innovation Systemic innovation, innovation diffusion Path dependence project delivery times in Norwegian oil industry

3 This also could take way towards megaprojects research (as metaorganizations) Gil, Sydow etc. Org. vs Product Organizational architecture vs. product architecture Karlos, RP Modularity, organizational research This also could take nuances towards IS discourse

4 Project success Project success paper #1 Contingency view Project success paper #2 dual view on the project from the seller s and from the buyer s perspectives: paired data

5 System life cycle view: reseach on the whole solution Integrated solutions Front-end -> back end operations/use phase Potential also for service research -> extending the system life cycle and also: which stakeholders? and also: business models?

6 waterfall vs. agile Agile: fail fast ( and in the computer) The power of modeling? Eloration vs. exploitation vs. experimentation -> prototyping -> fast production techniques product backlog involves the customer along to do the job we also can borrow from the service/solutions literature to use the co-creation-of value

7 Routines Routines Meta-routines -> AMJ

8 Operations management Customer-tailored vs. standard Hayes & Wheelwright One-of-a-kind, small batch, large batch, mass Learning curve (?) Depth of the supply chain? Engineer-to-order, assembly-to-order, etc. Supply chain management (VOP, OPP, Demand chain, supply chain)

9 Organizational integration OD E.g. Choi & Hong 2002 (Virpi)

10 Flexibility Organization research (also: fluidity, megaprojects as meta-orgs etc) maybe also: governance OD? -> Organization Studies, but also RP, JOM, SCM etc Also possibility to stretch towards uncertainty, unks unks etc.

11 Whose perspective? Buyer: JOM procurement E.g. How to procure complex performance Services (kwh) Product-service systems Seller: IMM System supplier RP, ICC systems integrator Both project-based firm

12 System life cycle

13 Shift from PM to Management of Projects Interaction with the business and general environment Adapted from Morris 2013 Project Definition Strategy & finance Technology (requirements, design, make, test) Commercial (supply chain, procurement, etc.) Organisational (structure & people) Time Budget Scope Project Delivery Integration given Time Cost Scope Risk Initiate Plan Execute Control delivered Human Resources Communications Quality Procurement Stakeholders Close Out Concept Feasibility Definition Execution Close-out / Operations

14 Figure 4 in: Artto K. A., Management of Project-oriented Organization Conceptual Analysis, pp in: Artto K. A., Martinsuo M., Aalto T. (eds.) Project Portfolio Management: Strategic Management through Projects, Project Management Association Finland, Helsinki, 176 p. Strategic portfolio decisions often occur only in pre-project and post-project phases (below: illustration of an external customer delivery project) WIDE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, EFFECTIVENESS IN BUSINESS WIDE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, EFFECTIVENESS IN BUSINESS Pre-project Phase EFFICIENT PM Post-project Phase Pre-bid Phase Bidding Phase Project Phase (Execution) Customer Care Future Business Start-up Execution Closeout Considerations of How the Potential Project would Contribute to Future Business Considering the Customer as the Major Risk/Success Factor for Business Success with Customers on the Long Run Guarantees Successful Project Deliveries in the Future Manage Customers, not Projects.

15 Value stream for an integrated solution Upstream (products) Manufacturing Service interface Downstream (services) Earlier stages M SI OS SP Final Consumer Added value (Backwards) Vertical moves (Forwards) Manufacture (M) Systems integration (SI) Operational Services (OS) Service Provision (SP) Raw materials, intermediate goods, primary products manufacture Design and produce components and subsystems Design, build, integrate products and systems Maintain and operate products and systems Buy in maintenance and operational capacity to provide services to final consumers Consumption of service by final consumer (e.g. train passenger) Davies, 2004

16 Supply chain (the depth of the chain, tier1, tier2, buyer vs seller, Manufacturing mode Efficiency vs Effectiveness)

17 Artto K., Heinonen R., Arenius M., Kovanen V., Nyberg T., Global Project Business and the Dynamics of Change, Technology Development Centre Finland and Project Management Association Finland, Helsinki, Finland, 147 p. Investment Decision Takeover Project-oriented Project Final Customer s Investment Project CUSTOMER S INVESTMENT PROJECT Preparation Execution Operation Contract Handing over Sub-subproject etc. Subproject Contractor s Delivery Project Subcontractor s Delivery Project etc. Sales and Marketing Execution After-sales services DELIVERY PROJECT OF THE PROJECT COMPANY Production (or Standard Product Oriented) Fig 5. Phases of project-based firm s project vs customer s investment project (p. 35) Fig 3. Change in project nature of project in the project delivery chain (p. 22)

18 Artto K., Heinonen R., Arenius M., Kovanen V., Nyberg T., Global Project Business and the Dynamics of Change, Technology Development Centre Finland and Project Management Association Finland, Helsinki, Finland, 147 p. Investment Decision Takeover Hierarchy Level Preparation Execution Operation Customer s investment project Sales and Marketing Contract Handing Over After-sales Execution services Contract Handing Over Delivery project Sales and Marketing Execution After-sales services Sales and Marketing Contract Handing Over After-sales Execution services Sub-delivery project Sales and Marketing Order Delivery After-sales Production services Order Delivery After-sales Production services Purchase of a customised product from a supplier (Make To Order) De livery Order Delivery Order Purchase of a standard product or component from a supplier (Make To Stock Fig 6. Interrelations between projects in hierarchical supply chain (p. 36)

19 Owner managed (with single and multiple contractors) Single contractor Multiple contractors TechCon O TechCon O C C C C C SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC

20 Project Services Contractor Project Services Contractor Project manager TechCon O PSC Project control O PSC C C C C SC SC Eng O PSC Proc O PSC Const O PSC SC SC SC

21 Contracting approaches Business Trust and mutual respect Relational contracts High definition Target sum bidding Focus on efficiency Alliances Goal alignment Early involvement Focus on effectiveness culture Transaction based and traditional Conventional High definition Lump sum Claim mentality Get out Simple Complex Business challenge Source: Turner & Simister 2001

22 Ruuska, Ahola, Artto, Locatelli, Mancini, 2011 Olkiluoto 3 vs. Flamanville 3 supply chain structures Olkiluoto 3 Flamanville 3

23 T5 approach to risk management risk Client risk Client Integrated Project Team Contractor Partners Traditional contracting Client dumps risk on contractors Price in advance Penalties T5 contracting Client bears the risk Reimburse incurred costs Success driven Source: Davies & Brady, 2008; Brady, 2007; Brady, Davies, Gann, & Rush, 2007; Brady 2008

24 Research method Microfoundational approach, qualitative Level of analysis (project?, firm?, relationship?) Case study? Process study? Ethnography observing (interviews, documents, fieldnotes e.g. in AMJ it is all about data ) 1st order variables, 2nd order constructs, the process model, (Ravasi, Corley, Goia) Design science what is your approach? CIMO? Research model

25 Strategic importance Size, scope Competition Cultural/institutional environment Shadow of the past / Shadow of the future Research model (Karlos example on project risk management success ) Contextual factors Risk management 1958 Dill (environment) Thompson 1967 (interdependency) 1967 Perrow (complexity) Technical complexity Results Risk management success (were risks known, preparedness, cost of realized risks %) Stakeholder environment complexity w many stakeholders, interconnectedness) Variance/distance btw Risk management approach Technical uncertainty (novelty) Rate of change? Project success Organizational uncertainty (do we know the customer, suppliers) Local conditions / site conditions