TY - BOOK
T1 - Institutional complexity affecting the outcomes of global projects
AU - Koivu, Tapio
AU - Tukiainen, Sampo
AU - Nummelin, Johanna
AU - Atkin, Brian
AU - Tainio, Risto
PY - 2004
Y1 - 2004
N2 - This report is of the findings of a project that aims at
understanding the effect of institutional and cultural
differences to outcomes of global projects. The aim of
this research is to model institutional complexity in
global projects accurately enough that one can predict
their impact on the project performance, build tools and
procedures for project managers for predicting project
performance, managing risks and creating better
foundations for improved project performance. It is a
complex endeavor to start gaining understanding from
global projects, creating a theory that applies to a
range of practical solutions and giving predictably to
project managers without being impractical. This has to
begin by describing the chain of phenomena from the
outcomes backwards toward the inception of a project.
After this chain has been thoroughly characterized,
researchers can begin the second stage, which is to
classify the phenomenon into categories. In the third
stage, researchers articulate a theory that asserts what
causes the phenomenon to occur, and why. The scope of the
research was intentionally limited to a sub-set of
institutional complexity in this first phase. We chose to
collect data from cultural differences in projects. The
first hypothesis was that cultural differences are likely
to have an effect on project performance and
coordination. At this stage, the correlation between, for
example, most commonly used dimensions of culture and
performance was not understood thoroughly enough to
actually model any behavior. However, a basic framework
for categorizing the basic phenomena was found.
Altogether seven case studies were conducted concerning
global projects executed by Kone Oyj, Foster Wheeler
Energia Oy and LT Consultants Ltd. These case study
projects provided a basis that can be described as the
Finnish project management culture. As we recognized to
follow the basic thinking that every project and
encounter is context specific, one could come up with
dozens of different sets of attributes depending on the
projects studied. This one is one of many alternatives
and might be typical to the company, persons and
professions. After identifying some of the main
characteristics of Finnish project management culture
encountering, and in some situations colliding with more
than 10 European and Middle East project management
cultures, the following main conclusions are presented
concerning the mechanisms affecting in these encounters:
- Decisive is not the "size" of the differences between
the cultures rather than the situational match/mismatch
between the differences - The nature of previous
encounters define some of the nature of future encounters
- Situational adaptation of one party reduces the need
for adaptation of the other party Based on these
observations we recommend the following: 1. Acquire local
institutional knowledge as much as possible and as early
as possible. 2. Cooperate and utilize knowledge of local
partners who have the right connections to right people
and authorities and who know the correct way of working
with them. 3. Practice self-reflection. 4. Pay attention
to situational characteristics and not so much to the
stereotypes of national cultural differences. Further
empirical data from these two groups of variables should
be generated by conducting more case studies with
systematic way of documenting all dependencies between
the variables and project performance.
AB - This report is of the findings of a project that aims at
understanding the effect of institutional and cultural
differences to outcomes of global projects. The aim of
this research is to model institutional complexity in
global projects accurately enough that one can predict
their impact on the project performance, build tools and
procedures for project managers for predicting project
performance, managing risks and creating better
foundations for improved project performance. It is a
complex endeavor to start gaining understanding from
global projects, creating a theory that applies to a
range of practical solutions and giving predictably to
project managers without being impractical. This has to
begin by describing the chain of phenomena from the
outcomes backwards toward the inception of a project.
After this chain has been thoroughly characterized,
researchers can begin the second stage, which is to
classify the phenomenon into categories. In the third
stage, researchers articulate a theory that asserts what
causes the phenomenon to occur, and why. The scope of the
research was intentionally limited to a sub-set of
institutional complexity in this first phase. We chose to
collect data from cultural differences in projects. The
first hypothesis was that cultural differences are likely
to have an effect on project performance and
coordination. At this stage, the correlation between, for
example, most commonly used dimensions of culture and
performance was not understood thoroughly enough to
actually model any behavior. However, a basic framework
for categorizing the basic phenomena was found.
Altogether seven case studies were conducted concerning
global projects executed by Kone Oyj, Foster Wheeler
Energia Oy and LT Consultants Ltd. These case study
projects provided a basis that can be described as the
Finnish project management culture. As we recognized to
follow the basic thinking that every project and
encounter is context specific, one could come up with
dozens of different sets of attributes depending on the
projects studied. This one is one of many alternatives
and might be typical to the company, persons and
professions. After identifying some of the main
characteristics of Finnish project management culture
encountering, and in some situations colliding with more
than 10 European and Middle East project management
cultures, the following main conclusions are presented
concerning the mechanisms affecting in these encounters:
- Decisive is not the "size" of the differences between
the cultures rather than the situational match/mismatch
between the differences - The nature of previous
encounters define some of the nature of future encounters
- Situational adaptation of one party reduces the need
for adaptation of the other party Based on these
observations we recommend the following: 1. Acquire local
institutional knowledge as much as possible and as early
as possible. 2. Cooperate and utilize knowledge of local
partners who have the right connections to right people
and authorities and who know the correct way of working
with them. 3. Practice self-reflection. 4. Pay attention
to situational characteristics and not so much to the
stereotypes of national cultural differences. Further
empirical data from these two groups of variables should
be generated by conducting more case studies with
systematic way of documenting all dependencies between
the variables and project performance.
KW - institutions
KW - cultures
KW - project management
M3 - Report
T3 - VTT Working Papers
BT - Institutional complexity affecting the outcomes of global projects
PB - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
CY - Espoo
ER -