Final Focus Group Workshop: Rethink! Project Stakeholder Management. Martina Huemann, Pernille Eskerod, Claudia Weninger WU Vienna,

Transcription

1 Final Focus Group Workshop: Rethink! Project Stakeholder Management Martina Huemann, Pernille Eskerod, Claudia Weninger WU Vienna, Partly sponsored by: In cooperation with:

2 Focus Group Workshop: Objectives Presenting and reflecting the findings of the research project: Rethink! Project Stakeholder Management Knowledge co-production of researchers and practitioners on project stakeholder management in the context of sustainable development principles Contribution to the research project: Rethink! Project Stakeholder Management

3 Focus Group Workshop: Participants Researchers: Martina Huemann, Pernille Eskerod, Claudia Weninger Constellation experts: Brigitte Sachs-Schaffer, Daniela Andratsch NETLIPSE representatives: Pau Lian Staal-Ong, Marcel Hertogh, Massimo Corradi Practitioners interested in project stakeholder management

4 Focus Group Workshop: Schedule Starting 8.30: Registration, gathering, coffee Welcome & start up Input: Research project and stakeholder management : Coffee break Coffee House Trip: Reflection of research propositions : Lunch break, Snacks in the room Input: Demonstration case studies Experiencing a systemic working form Reflection: Potentials & limits of systemic working forms for project stakeholder management All Martina & Pernille All Pernille & Martina Constellation expert All Final reflections, close down All

5

6 Research Project: Objectives Develop a more comprehensive project stakeholder management approach in the context of sustainable development to better support benefit creation for project investors and other project stakeholders Investigate potentials and limitations of systemic methods for project stakeholder analysis Co-creation of knowledge based on theory and in cooperation with practice practice case studies, demonstration case studies, focus group workshops Publications (PMI book 2014, journal articles etc.)

7 Overview cases Project: Branding Slagelse Strategy Project: IT System Implementation Project: Planning The West Link (Västlänken) Project: Establishing WU New Campus? Slagelse Municipality, Denmark IT Company, Denmark Trafikverket, Sweden WU Vienna,Austria? Public (change) Private (IT ) Public (infrastructure) Public (construction +)? Practice case Practice case Practice case? Demonstration case Systemic constellation (Focus: PM) Demonstration case Systemic constellation (Focus PM Demonstration case Systemic Board Systemic Constellation (Group)

8 Research Project: Schedule

9 Project Company Society Sustainable development principles Values-based Economic, ecologic, socialoriented Short, mid, long term-oriented Local, regional, global-oriented (Gareis, Huemann, Martinuzzi 2013)

10 Research Propositions

11 Project as temporary organization and social system No project is an island (Engwall 2003) A social system constitutes itself by differentiating itself from its context Internal structures/context Stakeholders are relevant social environments for a social system Limited possibility to manage projects and project stakeholder

12 Project as social system: Limits of managing Trivial System Social System Predictable Not depending on the context Possible to influence directly Result of influence clear Applications of standards Not predictable Depending on the context Not possible to influence directly Results of influence unclear Allowance of contradictions (based on Kasper 1990)

13 Managing internal structures and context Scope Schedule Costs (Gareis, Huemann, Martinuzzi 2013) Internal structures Scope, schedule, costs, and... Objectives, resources, income, risks Organization, culture, personnel Infrastructure Context Pre-, post-project phase Project stakeholders Other projects Company strategies, business case

14 Stakeholder Theory

15 Stakeholder theory: Definitions Those groups without whose support the organization would cease to exist (Stanford Research Institute 1963) Individuals or groups which depend on a given organization to fulfil their personal goals and on whom the organization is depended (Rhenman 1964) Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of a organization s objectives (Freeman 1984)

16 Stakeholder definitions in PM standards PMBOK, PMI (2008:246): Persons and organizations such as customers, sponsors, the performing organization, and the public that are actively involved in the project, or whose interests may be positively or negatively affected by the execution or completion of the project. ICB, IPMA (2006:42): People or groups, who are interested in the performance and or success of the project, or who are constrained by the project. PRINCE2 (2009:313): Any individual, group or organization that can affect, be affected by, or perceives itself to be affected by an initiative programme, project, activity, risk.

17 Stakeholder activities and tools/techniques PRINCE2 PMBOK ICB Activities Report to customers and suppliers. Identify, analyze and communicate. Identify; analyze; communicate; develop strategies; include interest parties interests into project; ensure satisfaction; manage changes; document. Tools/techniques Reports. Stakeholder analysis; stakeholder register; communication plan; project reports; project presentations; feedback from stakeholders. Stakeholder identification; analysis; formal/informal networks and communication; information sharing; list of stakeholder representatives.

18 Two different approaches in contemporary stakeholder theory (Freeman, Harrison & Wicks 2007) 1. Management of stakeholders approach An instrumental approach Stakeholders as means to provide resources A core mgmt. task: Make stakeholders comply to the organization s needs 2. Management for stakeholders approach A normative or ethical approach Stakeholders have legitimate rights regardless of their power to influence the organization A core mgmt. task: To search for win-win situations

19 Research Propositions

20 Proposition: A societal request for considering sustainable development as a context for projects places new demands on project stakeholder management Request for considering sustainable development principles makes complexity better visible Explicit and/or implicit integration od sustainable development principles, values makes the difference Need for a more comprehensive project stakeholder management approach Need for structural clearness to make it possible to think into the future

21 Proposition: Different social systems have different stakeholders and stakeholder relations, which requires to organize for transfers Social systems such as investor organization(s) project social system created by the project/program, e.g. hospital. Organize for transfer of stakeholder relations of the investor organization(s) to the project. Organizing for transfer of stakeholder relations (further) developed on a project to the following project (in a chain of projects) or to the investor organization(s) or to the new social system created.

22 Proposition: The possibility of managing stakeholders is limited The project has to relate itself to many different project stakeholders. Normally, there is a high diversity and lacking clarity of expectations of the project stakeholders towards the project. Predictability of what happens, if is rather low. Concrete definition of project success is difficult and determined from the specific point of view from the particular project stakeholder.

23 Proposition: Comprehensive project stakeholder management represents more a managing FOR stakeholders than a managing OF stakeholders approach The OF and FOR approaches are two extreme positions on a continuum. For a project a balancing between OF and FOR approach is adequate. Different project stakeholders may require different approaches, not for all stakeholders a FOR approach is feasibly. Different phases of a project require different approaches. A management for stakeholder approach fits to sustainable developments and reflects values balancing short-medium and long term-orientation, fairness, transparency, etc.

24 Proposition: There are differences in project stakeholder management and stakeholder management in the permanent organization regarding timing and organization. Stakeholder engagement may require more time, too late to start in an implementation project. Preparation by investor (organization), inclusion in project initiation or in an distinct project e.g. feasibility study, planning project. Cooperation with stakeholder management of investment organization necessary. Project stakeholder management is based on the values of the organization(s) involved in the project.

25 Proposition: A comprehensive project stakeholder management approach is reflected in the project structures The project structures need to allow to deal with the complexity of environment, for example different and contradicting stakeholder expectations. Internalization of external stakeholder interests into the project objectives, creation of integrated project organizations to invite representatives of stakeholders on the projects are possible strategies to deal with stakeholders which have an essential impact on the project structures.

26 Demonstration cases

27 Proposition: Adequate stakeholder management methods are required to build up complexity but also reduce complexity to the amount adequate for the project. Systemic methods such as system board and system constellation are adequate to deal with the complexity of the project stakeholders in a stakeholder analysis.

28 Application of methods in demonstration cases Project: Branding Slagelse Strategy Project: IT System Implementation Project: Planning The West Link Slagelse Municipality, Denmark IT Company, Denmark Trafikverket, Sweden Conflict situation Conflict situation Non-conflict situation; Systemic Constellation Single person view (PM) Systemic Constellation Single person view (PM) Systemic Board Group view Systemic Constellation Group view Participants: Externals Participants: Project externals, but company internals Participants: Project team

29 Case study: Project: Branding Slagelse Strategy

30 Characteristics and context of the case Purpose of new branding strategy: To be attractive for current and new citizens and businesses and thereby enhance increased tax revenues and satisfied stakeholders of municipality. The municipality hired an experienced external consultancy to undertake the branding strategy development. Even though an internal project manager and a project owner were appointed, decision concerning the project as well as the project management were outsourced to the consultancy. The internal project manager changed twice and the project owner once. The City Council had to approve the branding strategy.

31 The Project Model of Slagelse Municipality The external consultancy was responsible for the stakeholder management and did what they found best, so they did not use this project model.

32 Stakeholder practices Stakeholder management practices changed during the project course. In the beginning, the consultancy organized events to generate and discuss ideas with stakeholders. New stakeholders were involved in new events to discuss the results from the first event (a 30 hours camp). The external consultancy was solely in charge. Later, it was realized that the original stakeholders (especially the politicians in the City Council) felt left out of the process. Therefore, the consultancy and the internal project manager had individual meetings with the core stakeholders to make them take ownership again (as they had in the beginning).

33 Systemic Constellation: Process The Project Manager was in charge and she started to place the participants around the room so it gives a picture of the comprehension she has of the stakeholder landscape. Every participant represented a stakeholder, and the way they stood in relation to each other (position and space) symbolized their mutual relationship as the Project Manager sees it. At the beginning the participants were placed far away from each other and some of them stood back to back. Following, every participant discussed their position and they all gave inputs to improve the constellation.

34 Constellation: Initial Picture Middle Management Project Team Project Manager Project Owner Communication Department Consulting firm (brand) Project City Council 1 City Council 2

35 Systemic Constellation: End of process After the discussion with all of the stakeholders, some of them were replaced so they have better contact with each other and face to face. Finally the group placed the ideal stakeholder landscape where they all had connection. In the end of the exercise the Project Manager was surprised how the inputs and comments gave her new perspectives on the project.

36 Constellation: Final Picture Project Manager Consulting firm (brand) Vision Communication Department Project Project Team Middle Management City Council 2 City Council 1 Competitors of Slagelse Citizen of Slagelse

37 Some findings There are advantages and disadvantages by using an external consultancy to do a process like this: - The project gets more complicated when politician stakeholders are involved. - It became clear that all stakeholders had their own ideas and agendas, and that it was impossible to involve all stakeholders and keep the discussions open. - Furthermore, a close relationship between the external consultant and the project manager seemed important in order for the consultant to create legitimacy and progress. - Economically it is more expensive to hire an external company rather than use own employees from the organisation. Moreover, it becomes more objective when the consultancy is an external company and not made up of own employees. The new brand become: Healthy, Smart, Growth and you can associate these 3 words with what Slagelse City wants to be as a Municipality.

38 Case study: Project: Planning The West Link

39 Characteristics and context of the case Long term project, 20 billions Swedish Kroner (200 million Euros), large Proposal: differentiation investment, chain of projects Focus on stakeholder analysis/ management for different projects in the chain of projects. Context: other investments City development West Swedish Package (Infrastructure) Westlink very visible to public! Political issues, car toll for raising funds Communication: Part of the city development Infrastructure only Still need for integrating for example, city administration, operator of stations and others to have design follow service

40 Stakeholders City: Administration/politicians: decisions city development project, provide part of the finance, external project owner politicians expect something different than Västlänken is able to provide County Government: for legal permissions, environmental impact development, external project owner Gothenburg community: individuals more ore less effected car toll for co-financing project; car drivers against toll children Neighbouring communities: Access to workforce Media: Negative reports in local newspaper

41 Stakeholders - continued Trafikverket: Society Department as internal project owner Suppliers: red contract and blue contract consultants future contractors Land owners: for example Jenrnhusen, Liseberg, etc. Västtrafik: Most probably future operator of stations Environmental groups: Positive; tunnel will reduce car traffic and increase travel capacity to and from Gothenburg Project personnel: Management team, very engaged, high identification

42 . First findings

43 The West Link: Systemic Board

44

45

46 Rethink Project Stakeholder Management Partly sponsored by: In cooperation with: