Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Towards a holding environment: building shared understanding and commitment in projects

Towards a holding environment: building shared understanding and commitment in projects Purpose – The early stages of projects are often characterised by ambiguity arising from differences in stakeholder views regarding project rationale and objectives. The purpose of this paper is to present a viewpoint on how to build a shared understanding of project goals and thus reach a shared commitment to achieving them. One of the ways to achieve shared understanding is through open dialogue, free from political and other constraints. The authors call an environment that fosters such dialogue a holding environment . The main aim is to illustrate, via a case study: how an alliance‐based approach to projects can foster a holding environment; and how argument visualisation tools such as IBIS (Issue‐Based Information System) can be used to clarify different points of view and options within such an environment. Design/methodology/approach – Following a discussion of theoretical background and literature review, an alliancing case study is used to illustrate the development of a holding environment and demonstrate the utility of IBIS in the creation of such an environment. Findings – It is seen that an alliance‐based approach to projects can provide the foundation for a holding environment. IBIS is seen to facilitate the building of shared understanding by making arguments explicit and capturing decision rationale. Practical implications – The paper outlines a practical framework for improving the quality of dialogue and achieving stakeholder commitment on projects. Originality/value – Achieving shared understanding and commitment to action is difficult, particularly in the early stages of projects. The paper outlines the conditions and techniques needed to facilitate this via a non‐trivial case study. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Managing Projects in Business Emerald Publishing

Towards a holding environment: building shared understanding and commitment in projects

Download PDF
21 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/towards-a-holding-environment-building-shared-understanding-and-00zKtNuPIK
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1753-8378
DOI
10.1108/17538371211235353
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The early stages of projects are often characterised by ambiguity arising from differences in stakeholder views regarding project rationale and objectives. The purpose of this paper is to present a viewpoint on how to build a shared understanding of project goals and thus reach a shared commitment to achieving them. One of the ways to achieve shared understanding is through open dialogue, free from political and other constraints. The authors call an environment that fosters such dialogue a holding environment . The main aim is to illustrate, via a case study: how an alliance‐based approach to projects can foster a holding environment; and how argument visualisation tools such as IBIS (Issue‐Based Information System) can be used to clarify different points of view and options within such an environment. Design/methodology/approach – Following a discussion of theoretical background and literature review, an alliancing case study is used to illustrate the development of a holding environment and demonstrate the utility of IBIS in the creation of such an environment. Findings – It is seen that an alliance‐based approach to projects can provide the foundation for a holding environment. IBIS is seen to facilitate the building of shared understanding by making arguments explicit and capturing decision rationale. Practical implications – The paper outlines a practical framework for improving the quality of dialogue and achieving stakeholder commitment on projects. Originality/value – Achieving shared understanding and commitment to action is difficult, particularly in the early stages of projects. The paper outlines the conditions and techniques needed to facilitate this via a non‐trivial case study.

Journal

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 15, 2012

Keywords: Australia; Project management; Stakeholders; Strategic alliances; Project alliancing; Issue‐Based Information System; Holding environment; Dialogue mapping; Wicked problems; Project communication; Stakeholder management

References

  • Sense‐making as a process within complex service‐lead projects
    Alderman, N.; Ivory, C.; McLoughlin, I.; Vaughan, R.
  • The public interest in planning: from legitimation to substantive plan evaluation
    Alexander, E.R.
  • Mapping project dialogues using IBIS – a case study and some reflections
    Awati, K.
  • ‘The Agile Manifesto’ the Agile Alliance
    Beck, K.; Cockburn, A.; Jeffries, R.; Highsmith, J.
  • Paradigm lost or paradigm regained? Current Australian metropolitan strategies
    Bunker, R.
  • Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective
    Checkland, P.
  • Notes on improvisation and time in organisations
    Ciborra, C.
  • Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems
    Conklin, J.
  • gIBIS: a hypertext tool for exploratory policy discussion
    Conklin, J.; Begeman, M.L.
  • The Heretic's Guide to Best Practices: The Reality of Managing Complex Problems in Organisations
    Culmsee, P.; Awati, K.
  • Cannibals With Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business
    Elkington, J.
  • Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for The Social Sciences
    Elster, J.
  • The rise and fall of the Chaos report figures
    Eveleens, L.; Verhoef, C.
  • Habermas: A Very Short Introduction
    Finlayson, J.
  • Habermas and Foucault: thinkers for a civil society
    Flyvbjerg, B.
  • Planning and Foucault: in search of the dark side of planning theory
    Flyvbjerg, B.; Richardson, T.
  • Communicative action and formal pragmatics
    Fultner, B.
  • Communication as deliberation
    Gastil, J.
  • The Standish report: does it really describe a software crisis
    Glass, R.
  • Bridging the great divide: Nonaka's synthesis of Western and Eastern knowledge concepts reassessed
    Gueldenberg, S.; Helting, H.
  • Methodological individualism
    Heath, J.
  • Leadership Without Easy Answers
    Heifetz, R.A.
  • From Habermas' communicative theory to practice on the internet
    Heng, M.; de Moor, A.
  • Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: a social action theoretic analysis
    Hirschheim, R.; Klein, H.; Lyytinen, K.
  • Project work: the legacy of bureaucratic control in the post‐bureaucratic organisation
    Hodgson, D.
  • Making Projects Critical
  • Commentary on the intellectual structures of information systems development by Hirschheim, Klein and Lyytinen
    Introna, L.
  • Choosing between competing design ideals in information systems development
    Klein, H.; Hirschheim, R.
  • Issues as elements of information systems
    Kunz, W.; Rittel, H.W.J.
  • An introduction to charrettes
    Lennertz, B.; Lutzenhiser, A.; Failor, T.
  • From project ontologies to communities of virtue
    Linehan, C.; Kavanagh, D.
  • Value Management Guideline
    New South Wales Treasury
  • The concept of ‘Ba’: building a foundation for knowledge creation
    Nonaka, I.; Konno, N.
  • A behavioural approach to the rational choice theory of collective action
    Ostrom, E.
  • A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge
    Project Management Institute
  • On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generations
    Rittel, H.W.J.
  • Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
    Rittel, H.W.J.; Webber, M.
  • An introduction to project alliancing (on engineering and construction projects)
    Ross, J.
  • The practice level in participatory design rationale: studying practitioner moves and choices
    Selvin, A.; Buckingham Shum, S.; Aakhus, M.
  • The social learning character of projects and project teams
    Sense, A.
  • CHAOS Summary 2009
    Standish Group
  • Problematising project management
    Thomas, J.
  • A philosophical staircase for information systems definition, design and development: a discursive approach to reflective practice in ISD (part 1)
    Ulrich, W.
  • Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument mapping
    Van Gelder, T.
  • Project alliancing vs project partnering: a case study of the Australian National Museum Project
    Walker, D.; Hampson, K.; Peters, R.
  • Issues in front‐end decision making on projects
    Williams, T.; Samset, K.
  • Assessing communicative rationality as a transportation planning paradigm
    Willson, R.
  • The theory of the parent‐infant relationship
    Winnicott, D.W.
  • Understanding Computers and Cognition
    Winograd, T.; Flores, F.