工程管理专业外文文献以及汉文翻译.docx

工程管理专业外文文献以及汉文翻译.docx

《工程管理专业外文文献以及汉文翻译.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《工程管理专业外文文献以及汉文翻译.docx（23页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

工程管理专业外文文献以及汉文翻译

外文文献：

Theprojectmanagementofficeasanorganisationalinnovation

BrianHobbs*,MoniqueAubry,DenisThuillier

UniversityofQuebecatMontreal,DepartmentofManagementandTechnology,POBox8888,DowntownStation,Montreal,Que,CanadaH3C3P8

Received15May2008;accepted20May2008

Abstract

Thepaperpresentsaninvestigationofthecreationandthereconfigurationofprojectmanagementoffices（PMOs）asanorganizationalinnovation.Theanalysisof11organisationaltransformationscentredontheimplementationorreconfigurationofPMOsispresented.TheobjectiveofthepaperistocontributetoabetterunderstandingofPMOsandofthedynamicrelationshipbetweenprojectmanagementandtheorganisationalcontext.TheaimisalsotointegratetheexaminationofPMOsasanorganisationalinnovationintothemainstreamofresearchontheplaceofprojectmanagementinorganisationsandmorewidelytothe‘‘rethinkingofprojectmanagement.”

1.Introduction

Quiteoftenoverthelastdecade,theobservationhasbeenmadethatorganisationsarefacinganewcontextcharacterizedbyincreasedcompetition,increasedratesofproduct,serviceandprocessinnovationandanincreasingemphasisontimetomarket.Organisationshaverespondedtothesechallengesbydevelopingnew,moreflexibleorganisationalforms[1]inwhichprojectsarebothmorenumerousandmorestrategicallyimportant[2].Aspartoftheresponsetothesenewchallengesandaspartofthemovementtoincreaseboththenumberandthestrategicimportance

ofprojectsmanyorganisationshaveimplementedaneworganisationalentitythemostcommonnameforwhichistheprojectmanagementofficeorPMO.ThePMOhasbeenaddressedextensivelyintheprofessionalliterature[3–5].However,therehasbeenverylittletheoreticalorempiricalresearchonthetopic.Inaddition,thisorganisationalinnovationhasnotbeenexaminedextensivelywithintheliteraturestreamdescribedabove.

2.Recentsurvey-basedresearchonPMOs

Arecentsurvey-basedonthesynchronicdescriptionofalargenumberofPMOsandtheirorganisationalcontextshasshownextremevarietyinboththeformandfunctionofPMOs[6].Attemptstodatetoreducethisvarietytoalimitednumberofmodelshavefailed.Inaddition,theresearchshowedthatinthemajorityofcasesPMOsareunstablestructures,organisationsoftenreconfiguretheirPMOseveryfewyears.Thisinstabilitycanbeinterpretedasbothanillustrationofstructuringasanongoingorganisationalprocess[1]andasanillustrationoforganisationalexperimentationasorganisationssearchforanadequatestructuralarrangement[7].HalfoftherespondentstothesurveyreportthatthelegitimacyoftheirPMOinitspresentformisbeingquestioned.Thisisconsistentwithboththeinterpretationintermsofexperimentationandasearchforbestpracticesandwiththeinterpretationasaninstanceoftheinherentinstabilityofanongoingprocessofstructuring.

Inthesurvey-basedresearchcitedabove,correlationanalysisfoundnosystematicrelationshipsbetweentheexternalcontextintermsofeconomicsectororgeographicregionorinternalorganisationalcontext,ontheonehand,andthestructuralcharacteristicsofPMOsontheother.NoneoftheclassiccontingencyfactorsfromorganisationaltheorycorrelatedstronglywiththeformorfunctionofthePMOs.Apositivist,synchronicapproachhasprovidedarichdescriptionofthegreatvarietyfoundinthepopulationbuthasfailed,sofar,toprovideanadequateunderstandingofPMOs.ThepresentpaperreportstheresultofanefforttocometoabetterunderstandingofPMOsasanorganisationalinnovationbasedonthein-depthinvestigationofelevencases.

3.Theliteratureonorganisationalinnovation

FoursubsetsoftheliteratureoninnovationareexaminedtoidentifyalternativeapproachesrelevanttotheexaminationofPMOsasorganizationalinnovations.First,thegeneralliteratureoninnovationisexamined.Thisisfollowedbyanexaminationoftheliteraturebasedonevolutionary,co-evolutionaryandinstitutionalisomorphismapproaches.Allaresensitivetoevolutionovertime.

3.1.Thegeneralliteratureoninnovation

Earlyresearchoninnovationhadoperatedmostlyfromaneconomicperspectiveandageneralassumptionofgrowth[8].Theinterdisciplinarycurriculumhasdevelopedovertimewiththecontributionofnewknowledgestemmingfromavarietyofsources:

economics[9–11],organisationalmanagement[12],sociology[13]andsocialecology[14].Othersprovideacategorizationofinnovationbasedonproduct,processorarchitecture[15,16].Inthisperspective,organisationsareconsideredtobeverysimilar,respondingtothesameincentives.Theobjectivesofresearchareoftentoprovideorganisationswithpracticalsolutionsdeterminingfactorstoinnovativesuccess.

Innovationtheoryisnowshiftingtoasocialinnovationapproach,broadeningtheconceptoftechnologicalinnovationtoasocialsystem.‘‘[...]thesociologicalcrucialpointisthatorganisationshavenotonlybecomeprominentactorsinsociety,theymayhavebecometheonlykindofactorwithsignificantculturalandpoliticalinfluence.Yet,recentorganisationtheoryhassurprisinglylittletosayabouthoworganisationsaffectthesociety.”[13,p.148]Newquestionshaveemergedwhichleadtomotivationtheoryandtothecontextofinnovationthatrehabilitateshistoryalongwithinnovation,thusintroducingthetemporalelementtothesocialinnovationsystem[17,18].Thishistoricalperspectivewasanaturalstepaftertheecologicalmodelwhichdemonstratedtheusefulnessofthebiologicalmetaphorwiththeconceptsofevolutionandco-evolution[19].Thissocialapproachpavedthewayforlookingatorganisationsaspartofthesocialinnovationsystemandnewformsofstructureasinnovations.Alongthislineofthought,innovationisviewedasanartor,moreexactly,asacraft[18].Innovationthenbecomesacreativeact,thedynamicconstructionofsomethingnewinwhichitcanbedifficulttodiscernanyregularpattern1[20].

3.2.Fromevolutionarytheorytoco-evolution

Theevolutionarytheorywasdevelopedinthetheoryoforganizationsbasedonabiologicalmetaphor.Abasicevolutionarymodelofanorganisationenvisionsitasacollectionofroutinesorstablebundlesofactivities.Withtime,variationoccurswithintheseroutineswiththeresultthatanygivensetofroutinesevolves,whetherintentionallyornot.Acertainnumberofnewroutinesarethenadoptedastemporarilypermanentpractices.Thissimplevariation–selection–retentionrepeatscontinuously[21,p.76].

Evolutionarytheoriesaremadeupoftwomajorgroups:

contingencytheoriesandsocialtheories.Contingencytheoriesconsidertechnologicalchangeasanexogenousphenomenonwhichtriggersorganisationalevolution[8,22].Thisdeterministicapproachmakesstructuralarrangementspredictablefromvariablessuchascomplexity,uncertaintyandinterdependency,whichcanbeintegratedintoasingledimension–theabilitytotreatinformation[23].

Socialtheoriesvieworganisationsastechnologicalsocialconstructionsinwhichthecommunityoforganisationsdeterminesthenatureoftechnologicalevolution[22].Inthisapproach,organisationalstructuresareseenasprocessesinactionwhicharecontinuouslybuiltandrebuilt[23].Scottarguesthattheseapproachesaretwosidesofthesamecoin[23].Ontheonehand,technologycanbeconsideredthecausalagentwhichshapesthestructureoforganisations;whileontheotherhand,toreversethiscausaleffect,organisationsinfluencetheinnovationprocesswitheitherthecreationofanewtechnologyoritsearlyadoption[23].

Thiscomplementarityisrecognizedintheco-evolutiontheoryinwhichtechnologicalinnovationsarebelievedtogivetheimpetusthatinitiatesnewcyclesofvariation–selection–retentionandinwhichadynamicprocessofevolutionwithinnovationconstantlyfeedsorganisation[22,24].

Massinietal.[19]confirmthatevolutionarytheoryiscapableofexplainingchangesinorganisationalstructuresandroutines.Theyconcludethatorganisationaladaptationisaconsequenceofchangesrelatedtotheadoptionoftechnologicalinnovations.LookingatlargeWesternandJapanesefirmsattwodifferentperiodsintime（1992,1996）,theirresearchconfirmsboththeprogressiveadaptationovertimeandthetendencytoadoptorganisationalroutinesassociatedwithahighercapacityforflexibility.Thisalsoconfirmstheselectionandemergenceofdominantroutinessuggestedbytheevolutionarytheory.Theyalsoconfirmthatthesechangesarecontext-dependant:

theinstitutionalcontextinwhichorganisationsareembeddeddefinespatternsoforganisationalstructuresandstrategies.

3.3.Co-evolution

Inbiology,co-evolutionisdefinedasevolutioninvolvingsuccessivechangesintwoormoreecologicallyinterdependentspecies（asofaplantanditspollinators）thataffecttheirinteractions.（Merriam-Webster,11thCollegiateDictionary）Therelationcouldbeofapredator-preynatureorofasymbioticnature.Co-evolutionisalsousedinanarrowercontextwhenitreferstoaspecificformofrelation（insideoroutsideofacompany）adoptedforshorttermresults.EisenhardtandGalunic[25]refertoco-evolution（ofasymbioticnature）whentheyarguethatmulti-businesscorporationsareco-evolvingecosystems.Fromthatviewpoint,collaborationoccursonlywhenitgivesapositiveperformanceresultintermsofgrowth,sharesandprofits.

Co-evolutionhelpsusunderstandtheevolutionofcomplexsystems.Atamacro-level2,RosenkopfandTushman[22]proposeaframeworktoexaminevariousstagesofco-evolutionoforgani