公私项目治理机制的共同演化与合作

IF 6.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Operations Management Pub Date : 2023-12-04 DOI:10.1002/joom.1281
Audrey Rouyre, Anne-Sophie Fernandez, Isabel Estrada
{"title":"公私项目治理机制的共同演化与合作","authors":"Audrey Rouyre,&nbsp;Anne-Sophie Fernandez,&nbsp;Isabel Estrada","doi":"10.1002/joom.1281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One important question in public-private (PP) projects is how to manage coopetition—simultaneous cooperation and competition among project members. Prior studies on the governance of PP projects showed the importance of governance mechanisms to deal with major events such as technical or organizational disruptions but paid limited attention to the management of coopetition. At the same time, research on the management of coopetition mostly focused on industrial coopetition, whereas PP projects also entail public-private coopetition. Seeking to better understand how governance mechanisms may help manage coopetition in PP projects, we conducted an in-depth study of Galileo—a large PP project aimed at delivering Europe's own satellite-based navigation system. The findings show how three core aspects of project governance—(i) mechanisms (joint vs. separate use of contractual and relational mechanisms), (ii) form (lead organization vs. shared governance), and (iii) goals (to promote cooperation and/or prevent competition)—jointly explained the emergence and (mis)management of knowledge- and value-related coopetitive tensions. In turn, these tensions prompted a series of adaptations in the governance of the project. Our study contributes to a co-evolutionary understanding of the governance of PP projects and offers implications for practitioners seeking to (re)design PP project governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"70 1","pages":"50-79"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Co-evolution of governance mechanisms and coopetition in public-private projects\",\"authors\":\"Audrey Rouyre,&nbsp;Anne-Sophie Fernandez,&nbsp;Isabel Estrada\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/joom.1281\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>One important question in public-private (PP) projects is how to manage coopetition—simultaneous cooperation and competition among project members. Prior studies on the governance of PP projects showed the importance of governance mechanisms to deal with major events such as technical or organizational disruptions but paid limited attention to the management of coopetition. At the same time, research on the management of coopetition mostly focused on industrial coopetition, whereas PP projects also entail public-private coopetition. Seeking to better understand how governance mechanisms may help manage coopetition in PP projects, we conducted an in-depth study of Galileo—a large PP project aimed at delivering Europe's own satellite-based navigation system. The findings show how three core aspects of project governance—(i) mechanisms (joint vs. separate use of contractual and relational mechanisms), (ii) form (lead organization vs. shared governance), and (iii) goals (to promote cooperation and/or prevent competition)—jointly explained the emergence and (mis)management of knowledge- and value-related coopetitive tensions. In turn, these tensions prompted a series of adaptations in the governance of the project. Our study contributes to a co-evolutionary understanding of the governance of PP projects and offers implications for practitioners seeking to (re)design PP project governance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Operations Management\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"50-79\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Operations Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1281\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1281","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公私合营项目中的一个重要问题是如何管理项目成员之间的合作与竞争。先前关于PP项目治理的研究表明治理机制对于处理重大事件(如技术或组织中断)的重要性,但对合作管理的关注有限。同时,关于合作管理的研究多集中在产业合作上,而PP项目也涉及到公私合作。为了更好地理解治理机制如何有助于管理PP项目中的合作,我们对伽利略进行了深入研究——这是一个旨在提供欧洲自己的卫星导航系统的大型PP项目。研究结果显示了项目治理的三个核心方面——(i)机制(联合与单独使用契约和关系机制),(ii)形式(领导组织与共享治理),以及(iii)目标(促进合作和/或防止竞争)——如何共同解释了与知识和价值相关的合作紧张局势的出现和(错误的)管理。反过来,这些紧张关系促使了项目管理方面的一系列调整。我们的研究有助于对PP项目治理的共同进化理解,并为寻求(重新)设计PP项目治理的从业者提供启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Co-evolution of governance mechanisms and coopetition in public-private projects

One important question in public-private (PP) projects is how to manage coopetition—simultaneous cooperation and competition among project members. Prior studies on the governance of PP projects showed the importance of governance mechanisms to deal with major events such as technical or organizational disruptions but paid limited attention to the management of coopetition. At the same time, research on the management of coopetition mostly focused on industrial coopetition, whereas PP projects also entail public-private coopetition. Seeking to better understand how governance mechanisms may help manage coopetition in PP projects, we conducted an in-depth study of Galileo—a large PP project aimed at delivering Europe's own satellite-based navigation system. The findings show how three core aspects of project governance—(i) mechanisms (joint vs. separate use of contractual and relational mechanisms), (ii) form (lead organization vs. shared governance), and (iii) goals (to promote cooperation and/or prevent competition)—jointly explained the emergence and (mis)management of knowledge- and value-related coopetitive tensions. In turn, these tensions prompted a series of adaptations in the governance of the project. Our study contributes to a co-evolutionary understanding of the governance of PP projects and offers implications for practitioners seeking to (re)design PP project governance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Operations Management
Journal of Operations Management 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
62
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading academic publication dedicated to advancing the field of operations management (OM) through rigorous and original research. The journal's primary audience is the academic community, although it also values contributions that attract the interest of practitioners. However, it does not publish articles that are primarily aimed at practitioners, as academic relevance is a fundamental requirement. JOM focuses on the management aspects of various types of operations, including manufacturing, service, and supply chain operations. The journal's scope is broad, covering both profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. The core criterion for publication is that the research question must be centered around operations management, rather than merely using operations as a context. For instance, a study on charismatic leadership in a manufacturing setting would only be within JOM's scope if it directly relates to the management of operations; the mere setting of the study is not enough. Published papers in JOM are expected to address real-world operational questions and challenges. While not all research must be driven by practical concerns, there must be a credible link to practice that is considered from the outset of the research, not as an afterthought. Authors are cautioned against assuming that academic knowledge can be easily translated into practical applications without proper justification. JOM's articles are abstracted and indexed by several prestigious databases and services, including Engineering Information, Inc.; Executive Sciences Institute; INSPEC; International Abstracts in Operations Research; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; SciSearch/Science Citation Index; CompuMath Citation Index; Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology; Information Access Company; and Social Sciences Citation Index. This ensures that the journal's research is widely accessible and recognized within the academic and professional communities.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information When does it pay to be green? The strategic benefits of adoption speed Registered reports review for field experiments Helping hampered bidders—Do subsidy auctions work as intended? Steering through the storm: Environmental uncertainty and delivery performance
×
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