Managing tensions and paradoxes between stakeholders in a complex project context: Case study and model proposal

François Labelle, Aliénor de Rouffignac, P. Lemire, C. Bredillet, S. Barnabé
{"title":"Managing tensions and paradoxes between stakeholders in a complex project context: Case study and model proposal","authors":"François Labelle, Aliénor de Rouffignac, P. Lemire, C. Bredillet, S. Barnabé","doi":"10.19255/JMPM02012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stakeholder (SH) management has recently undertaken a turn from the traditional management \"of\" to managing \"for\" and \"with\" SH. Relating to this relational trend, identification and management tensions between SH is an important area of study. Indeed, from how to live with and/or resolve or not those tensions depends the possibility of building the most beneficial cooperation possible between SH for the continuation of the project, to obtain win-win results, and promote shared value and common good. For this purpose, a theoretical model is suggested, based on the approaches of paradoxes and conventionalist economy of worth, supporting the identification of tensions between SH and their justifications, and the clarification it helps to bring as to win-win or shared value outcomes, or the absence of such, in the context of a complex project. The suggested model is then used in an exploratory case study. The goal is to assess its relevance, usefulness and quality. Two theoretical contributions emerge from the data analysed: 1) several tensions  over various categories (allegiance, dimensional, temporal, learning, performance and spatial) can draw on the same justifications (rationale that oppose industrial and domestic conventions); 2) a prioritization of tension categories can make it easier to resolve them.","PeriodicalId":320094,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Modern Project Management","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Modern Project Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19255/JMPM02012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Stakeholder (SH) management has recently undertaken a turn from the traditional management "of" to managing "for" and "with" SH. Relating to this relational trend, identification and management tensions between SH is an important area of study. Indeed, from how to live with and/or resolve or not those tensions depends the possibility of building the most beneficial cooperation possible between SH for the continuation of the project, to obtain win-win results, and promote shared value and common good. For this purpose, a theoretical model is suggested, based on the approaches of paradoxes and conventionalist economy of worth, supporting the identification of tensions between SH and their justifications, and the clarification it helps to bring as to win-win or shared value outcomes, or the absence of such, in the context of a complex project. The suggested model is then used in an exploratory case study. The goal is to assess its relevance, usefulness and quality. Two theoretical contributions emerge from the data analysed: 1) several tensions  over various categories (allegiance, dimensional, temporal, learning, performance and spatial) can draw on the same justifications (rationale that oppose industrial and domestic conventions); 2) a prioritization of tension categories can make it easier to resolve them.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理复杂项目环境中涉众之间的紧张关系和矛盾:案例研究和模型建议
利益相关者(SH)管理最近开始从传统的“对”管理转向“为”和“与”SH管理。与这种关系趋势相关,SH之间的识别和管理紧张关系是一个重要的研究领域。事实上,从如何处理和/或解决这些紧张关系,取决于是否有可能在SH之间建立最有利的合作,以使项目继续下去,获得双赢的结果,促进共享价值和共同利益。为此,基于悖论和传统价值经济学的方法,提出了一个理论模型,支持识别SH及其理由之间的紧张关系,并澄清它有助于在复杂项目的背景下带来双赢或共享价值结果,或缺乏这样的结果。然后将建议的模型用于探索性案例研究。目标是评估其相关性、有用性和质量。从分析的数据中产生了两个理论贡献:1)不同类别(忠诚、维度、时间、学习、表现和空间)的几种紧张关系可以利用相同的理由(反对工业和家庭惯例的理由);2)对紧张类别进行优先排序可以使它们更容易解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Project recovery: Project failures and how to get rid of them Agile Enhancement of Critical PMBoK v6 Processes Whole Life Program Success, Leadership Competencies and Motivation for Learning – UK Defence Case Project Resource Optimization Considering Labor Productivity Factors Service based framework of research projects in higher education institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1