Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:54:38.325Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 30 - Project-Based Temporary Organizing and Routine Dynamics

from Part III - Themes in Routine Dynamics Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2021

By
Eugenia Cacciatori  and
Andrea Prencipe
Edited by
Martha S. Feldman ,
Brian T. Pentland ,
Luciana D'Adderio ,
Katharina Dittrich ,
Claus Rerup  and
David Seidl
Martha S. Feldman
Affiliation:
University of California, Irvine
Brian T. Pentland
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Luciana D'Adderio
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Katharina Dittrich
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Claus Rerup
Affiliation:
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management
David Seidl
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
Get access

Summary

Projects are forms of organizing that have become increasingly common in the past decades. The ad-hoc and temporary nature of projects seemingly poses significant challenges to the patterning of activities into organizational routines. Yet, considerable research in routine dynamics has been carried out in project contexts. In this chapter, we show that projects and routines share some common characteristics and that acknowledging the project nature of routines as well as the organizational routine nature of projects offers significant opportunities for the advancement of routine dynamics research.

Keywords

Routinesroutine dynamicsprojectsproject-based organizingtemporary organizationstemporary organizing
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics , pp. 407 - 420
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Addyman, S., Pryke, S. and Davies, A. (2020). Re-creating organizational routines to transition through the project life cycle: A case study of the reconstruction of london’s bank underground station Project Management Journal, 51(5), 522–537.Google Scholar
Aroles, J. and McLean, C. (2016). Rethinking stability and change in the study of organizational routines: Difference and repetition in a newspaper-printing factory. Organization Science, 27(3), 535–550.Google Scholar
Arthur, M. B., DeFillippi, R. and Jones, C. (2001). Project-based learning as the interplay of career and company non-financial capital. Management Learning, 32(1), 99–117.Google Scholar
Bakker, R. M., Cambré, B., Korlaar, L. and Raab, J. (2011). Managing the project learning paradox: A set-theoretic approach toward project knowledge transfer. International Journal of Project Management, 29(5), 494–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R. M., DeFillippi, R. J., Schwab, A. and Sydow, J. (2016). Temporary organizing: Promises, processes, problems. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1703–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bapuji, H., Hora, M. and Saeed, A. M. (2012). Intentions, intermediaries, and interaction: Examining the emergence of routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1586–1607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y. and King, J. L. (2016). Routines as shock absorbers during organizational transformation: Integration, control, and nasa’s enterprise information system. Organization Science, 27(3), 551–572.Google Scholar
Bertels, S., Howard-Grenville, J. and Pek, S. (2016). Cultural molding, shielding, and shoring at oilco: The role of culture in the integration of routines. Organization Science, 27(3), 573–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birnholtz, J. P., Cohen, M. D. and Hoch, S. V. (2007). Organizational character: On the regeneration of camp poplar grove. Organization Science, 18(2), 315–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanche, C. and Cohendet, P. (2019). Remounting a ballet in a different context: A complementary understanding of routines transfer theories. Routine Dynamics in Action: Replication and Transformation (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 61). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, T. and Davies, A. (2004). Building project capabilities: From exploratory to exploitative learning. Organisation Studies, 25(9), 1601–1621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A. and Swan, J. (2004). Embedding new management knowledge in project-based organizations. Organisation Studies, 25(9), 1535–1555.Google Scholar
Bresnen, M., Goussevskaia, A. and Swan, J. (2005). Organizational routines, situated learning and processes of change in project-based organizations. Project Management Journal, 36(3), 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brookes, N., Sage, D., Dainty, A., Locatelli, G. and Whyte, J. (2017). An island of constancy in a sea of change: Rethinking project temporalities with long-term megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(7), 1213–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, C. M. and Morley, M. J. (2016). On temporary organizations: A review, synthesis and research agenda. Human Relations, 69(6), 1235–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bygballe, L. E. and Swärd, A. (2019). Collaborative project delivery models and the role of routines in institutionalizing partnering. Project Management Journal, 50(2), 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cacciatori, E. (2008). Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms. Research Policy, 37(9), 1591–1601.Google Scholar
Cacciatori, E. (2012). Resolving conflict in problem-solving: Systems of artifacts in the development of new routines. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1559–1585.Google Scholar
Cacciatori, E., Tamoschus, D. and Grabher, G. (2012). Knowledge transfer across projects: Codification in creative, high-tech and engineering industries. Management Learning, 43(3), 309–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., Frederiksen, L. and Täube, F. (2011). Project-based organizing and strategic management: A long-term research agenda on temporary organizational forms. In Project-Based Organizing and Strategic Management. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. xv–xxxix.Google Scholar
Clegg, S. R. and Courpasson, D. (2004). Political hybrids: Tocquevillean views on project organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 41(4), 525–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohendet, P. S. and Simon, L. O. (2016). Always playable: Recombining routines for creative efficiency at Ubisoft Montreal’s video game studio. Organization Science, 27(3), 614–632.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2003). Configuring software, reconfiguring memories: The influence of integrated systems on the reproduction of knowledge and routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(2), 321–350.Google Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2008). The performativity of routines: Theorising the influence of artefacts and distributed agencies on routines dynamics. Research Policy, 37(5), 769–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.Google Scholar
Danner-Schröder, A. and Geiger, D. (2016). Unravelling the motor of patterning work: Toward an understanding of the microlevel dynamics of standardization and flexibility. Organization Science, 27(3), 633–658.Google Scholar
Davies, A. and Brady, T. (2000). Organisational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: Towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 931–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A., Brady, T., Prencipe, A. and Hobday, M. (2011). Innovation in complex products and systems: Implications for project-based organizing. In Project-Based Organizing and Strategic Management. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 3–26.Google Scholar
Davies, A., Frederiksen, L., Cacciatori, E. and Hartmann, A. (2018). The long and winding road: Routine creation and replication in multi-site organizations. Research Policy, 47(8), 1403–1417.Google Scholar
Davies, A., Gann, D. and Douglas, T. (2009). Innovation in megaprojects: Systems integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5. California Management Review, 51(2), 101–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A., MacAulay, S., DeBarro, T. and Thurston, M. (2014). Making innovation happen in a megaproject: London’s crossrail suburban railway system. Project Management Journal, 45(6), 25–37.Google Scholar
Deken, F., Carlile, P. R., Berends, H. and Lauche, K. (2016). Generating novelty through interdependent routines: A process model of routine work. Organization Science, 27(3), 659–677.Google Scholar
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S. and Seidl, D. (2016). Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3), 678–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, K. and Seidl, D. (2018). Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 111–138.Google Scholar
Ebers, M. and Maurer, I. (2016). To continue or not to continue? Drivers of recurrent partnering in temporary organizations. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1861–1895.Google Scholar
Eccles, R. G. (1981). The quasifirm in the construction industry. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2(4), 335–357.Google Scholar
Edmondson, A. and Zuzul, T. (2016). Teaming routines in complex innovation projects. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Engwall, M. (2003). No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Research Policy, 32, 789–808.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2000). Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6), 611–629.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. (2016). Routines as process: Past, present, and future. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C., Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., Pentland, B. T., D’Adderio, L. and Lazaric, N. (2016). Beyond routines as things: Introduction to the special issue on routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 505–513.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Rafaeli, A. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39(3), 309–331.Google Scholar
Gann, D. and Salter, A. (1998). Learning and innovation management in project-based, service enhanced firms. International Journal of Innovation Management, 2(4), 431–454.Google Scholar
Gann, D. and Salter, A. (2000). Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: The construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 955–972.Google Scholar
Glaser, V. (2017). Design performances: How organizations inscribe artifacts to change routines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6), 2126–2154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabher, G. (2002a). Cool projects, boring institutions: Temporary collaboration in social context. Regional Studies: Special Issue on Production in Projects: Economic Geographies of Temporary Collaboration, 36(3), 215–214.Google Scholar
Grabher, G. (2002b). Fragile sector, robust practice: Project ecologies in new media. Environment and Planning A, 34(11), 1911–1926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabher, G. (2002c). The project ecology of advertising: Tasks, talents and teams. Regional Studies: Special Issue on Production in Projects: Economic Geographies of Temporary Collaboration, 36(3), 245–262.Google Scholar
Grabher, G. (2004). Temporary architectures of learning: Knowledge governance in project ecologies. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1491–1514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabher, G. (2005, 6–7 January). Supporting projects, cannibalizing firms? Personal knowledge networks in creative project ecologies. Paper presented at the Third KGP Project Meeting. Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
Hobday, M. (2000). The project-based organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Research Policy, 29(7–8), 871–893.Google Scholar
Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6), 618–636.Google Scholar
Ibert, O. (2004). Projects and firms as discordant complements: Organizational learning in the Munich software ecology. Research Policy, 33, 1529–1546.Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, P., Bednarek, R. and Spee, P. (2016). The role of artifacts in establishing connectivity within professional routines: A question of entanglement. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–139.Google Scholar
Lampel, J. (2001). The core competencies of effective project execution: The challenge of diversity. International Journal of Project Management, 19(8), 471–483.Google Scholar
Lampel, J. and Shamsie, J. (2003). Capabilities in motion: New organizational forms and the reshaping of the Hollywood movie industry*. Journal of Management Studies, 40(8), 2189–2210.Google Scholar
Ligthart, R., Oerlemans, L. and Noorderhaven, N. (2016). In the shadows of time: A case study of flexibility behaviors in an interorganizational project. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1721–1743.Google Scholar
Lindkvist, L., Söderlund, J. and Tell, F. (1998). Managing product development projects: On the significance of fountains and deadlines. Organization Studies, 19(6), 931–951.Google Scholar
Lundin, R. A. and Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(4), 437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manning, S. (2005). Managing project networks as dynamic organizational forms: Learning from the TV movie industry. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 410–414.Google Scholar
Manning, S. and Sydow, J. (2011). Projects, paths, and practices: Sustaining and leveraging project-based relationships. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(5), 1369–1402.Google Scholar
March, J., Sproull, L. and Tamuz, M. (1991). Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organization Science, 2(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
Maurer, I. (2010). How to build trust in inter-organizational projects: The impact of project staffing and project rewards on the formation of trust, knowledge acquisition and product innovation. International Journal of Project Management, 28(7), 629–637.Google Scholar
Obstfeld, D. (2012). Creative projects: A less routine approach toward getting new things done. Organization Science, 23(6), 1571–1592.Google Scholar
Rerup, C. and Feldman, M. S. (2011). Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 577–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organization Science, 20(2), 384–409.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2011). Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities. Journal of Management, 37(2), 468–490.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Rerup, C. (2018). Routine regulation: Balancing conflicting goals in organizational routines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(1), 170–209.Google Scholar
Scarbrough, H., Panourgias, N. S. and Nandhakumar, J. (2015). Developing a relational view of the organizing role of objects: A study of the innovation process in computer games. Organization Studies, 36(2), 197–220.Google Scholar
Scarbrough, H., Swan, J., Laurent, S., Bresnan, M., Edelman, L. and Newell, S. (2004). Project-based learning and the role of learning boundaries. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1579–1600.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T., Braun, T. and Sydow, J. (2019). Copying routines for new venture creation: How replication can support entrepreneurial innovation. Research in Sociology of Organizations, 61, 55–78.Google Scholar
Schwab, A. and Miner, A. S. (2008). Learning in hybrid-project systems: The effects of project performance on repeated collaboration. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1117–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, A. and Miner, A. S. (2011). Organizational learning implications of partnering flexibility in project-venture settings: A multilevel framework. Advances in Strategic Management, 28, 115–145.Google Scholar
Sele, K. and Grand, S. (2016). Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3), 722–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, B. and Lorino, P. (2016). Re-viewing routines through a pragmatist lens. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 47–70.Google Scholar
Söderlund, J. and Tell, F. (2009). The p-form organization and the dynamics of project competence: Project epochs in asea/abb, 1950–2000. International Journal of Project Management, 27(2), 101–112.Google Scholar
Spee, P., Jarzabkowski, P. and Smets, M. (2016). The influence of routine interdependence and skillful accomplishment on the coordination of standardizing and customizing. Organization Science, 27(3), 759–781.Google Scholar
Starkey, K., Barnatt, C. and Tempest, S. (2000). Beyond networks and hierarchies: Latent organizations in the UK television industry. Organization Science, 11(3), 299.Google Scholar
Stjerne, I. S. and Svejenova, S. (2016). Connecting temporary and permanent organizing: Tensions and boundary work in sequential film projects. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1771–1792.Google Scholar
Swan, J., Robertson, M. and Newell, S. (2016). Dynamic in-capabilities: The paradox of routines in the ecology of complex innovation. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 203–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, J., Scarbrough, H. and Newell, S. (2010). Why don’t (or do) organizations learn from projects? Management Learning, 41(3), 325–344.Google Scholar
Sydow, J., Lindkvist, L. and DeFillippi, R. (2004). Project-based organizations, embeddedness and repositories of knowledge: Editorial. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1475–1489.Google Scholar
Tranfield, D., Young, M., Partington, D., Bessant, J. and Sapsed, J. (2003). Knowledge management routines for innovation projects: Developing a hierarchical process model. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(01), 27–49.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. (2014). The temporal dimension of routines and their outcomes: Exploring the role of time in the capabilities and practice perspectives. In Time and Work, volume 2. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 125–155.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Cacciatori, E. (2016). The multiplicity of habit: Implications for routines research. In Howard-Grenville, J., Rerup, C. and Tsoukas, H., eds., Organizational Routines: How They Are Created, Maintained, and Changed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 71–95.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Fern, M. J. (2012). Examining the stability and variability of routine performances: The effects of experience and context change. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1407–1434.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. (2011). A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change Organization Science, 23(1), 24–46.Google Scholar
Turner, S. F. and Rindova, V. P. (2018). Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1253–1280.Google Scholar
van Marrewijk, A., Ybema, S., Smits, K., Clegg, S. and Pitsis, T. (2016). Clash of the titans: Temporal organizing and collaborative dynamics in the Panama Canal megaproject. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1745–1769.Google Scholar
Whyte, J., Tryggestad, K. and Comi, A. (2016). Visualizing practices in project-based design: Tracing connections through cascades of visual representations. Engineering Project Organization Journal, 6(2–4), 115–128.Google Scholar
Windeler, A. and Sydow, J. (2001). Project networks and changing industry practices collaborative content production in the German television industry. Organization Studies, 22(6), 1035–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×