1. Ivana Burcar Dunović Agnieszka Lukasiewicz Louis-Francois Pau
The methodology to research of internal, external stakeholders in megaprojects
Ivana Burcar Dunović
Agnieszka Lukasiewicz
Louis-Francois Pau

2. Research questions
How project context and local cultures influence stakeholder’s behaviour?
How do the stakeholders interact?
How do stakeholders impact the project thorough their behaviour?
How to measure stakeholder involvement? NB: how is involvement defined? -
Project performance by classical metrics is only a CONSEQUENCE of the above
Therefore data analysis of project performances alone is like looking at output variables, without considering exogeneous and endogenesous variables .

3. Stakeholders (eksternal)
Research concept
Culture and context
Stakeholders (eksternal)
Impact on the project

4. CONTEXTUAL & CULTURAL BASIS (L-F)
Method based on measures from established disciplines:
A) culturally affected micro-behaviors (of individuals and teams within each stakeholder)
B) physioeconomics
C) synergy processes in organizational theory
Analysis of these measures by gap analysis is carried out
In the gap analysis, an attribute value 3 corresponds to a normal situation, while 1 and 5 correspond to opposite extremes in the cultural and organizational sense
Resulting in a toolbox to characterize and compare megaprojects based on their contextual and cultural attributes

5. CONTEXTUAL & CULTURAL BASIS: GAP ANALYSIS MEASURES (I)
Some measures are exogeneous, while others depend on user feedback
Leadership style
Promoting equality/open to compromise – 1
Using hierarchy/authority – 5
Project concept incubation style
Innovative – 1
Conformity or standard solution to a new situation – 5
Endorsement processes in the project initiation phase
Bottom-up/ Democratic/ Critics allowed - 1
Top-down/ Authoritarian/ No critics allowed – 5
Project staffing
Few people / high skills – 1
Plentifull / average skills – 5
Communications style around project
No public communication - 1
Wide public communication and feedback -5
Governance
None / Minimal – 1
Public scrutinity / Company wide - 5

6. GAP ANALYSIS MEASURES (II)
Organizational team culture
No synergy / Conflict prone - 1
High synergy / Organizational Consensus – 5
Executing and controlling the project
Formal /Rigid / Heavy forward planning and reviews – 1
Pragmatic / Tools as a support – 5
Accountability for success/failure
Decentralized between stakeholders – 1
Centralized – 5
Significant fines actually levied in case of delays
Nominal
Significant / Dissuasive
Risk view by Project owners (attitude)
Embracing risk - 1
Avoiding risk - 5
Willingness of Project owners to change contractors
Low - 1
High - 5

7. GAP ANALYSIS MEASURES (III)
Values: Main contractor
Promote Social and public value of the project – 1
Profitability – 5
Values: Project funders
Profitability-5
Political interference
Weak - 1
Strong - 5
Project achieving Green policy goals
None - 1
Very significant - 5

8. ANALYSIS and OUTPUT OF CULTURAL MEASURES
Case data from a megaproject: e.g. Anholt Offshore Wind Farm (now completed) : (Denmark, References, (3,1,2,5,4,2,4,4,5,4,4,2,2,3,2,5))
Analysis of cultural measures
Clustering into groups of megaprojects exposed to similar contextual and cultural influences (across countries, or within a given country)
Comparison of extremes for a given measure, and justification by cultural differences in behavioral, organizational or decision traditions
OUTPUT for Stakeholder network analysis :
a) homogeneous clusters of similar megaprojects (clustered by a))
b) or megaprojects grouped by extreme values of a given cultural attribute, to better explain stakeholder relations due to that attribute

9. ILLUSTRATION OF OUTPUT TO NEXT LEVEL
Social network analysis of stakeholder relations
Politically driven projects
Projects with high loss risk on project manager (loss of contract, fines)
Projects with lean management and high team synergies
NB: The three bottom clusters are examples generated by clustering from data

10. INTERACTION FLOW Project values and user-stakeholder assessment
Stakeholder behavior
Culture and context
Project
execution
Impact
Performance
Stakeholder interactions
Exogenous
Endogenous
Output
USERS are key; you dont do a project for stakeholders also and their feedback impacts selection of stakeholders !!!!! ??????

11. Stakeholders impact cluster (I&A )
On what?
From the external stakeholder’s point of view the most important is the sustainability
personal /internal
global/ external
the PRiSM (Project Integrating Sustainable Method) or Green Project management allows us analyse interest and impact of stakeholders
The concept is based on 5P’s
Product/The deliverable- result
Process
People/Social
Planet/Environmental 3P’s
Profit/Economical

12. OMEGA Centre’s adaptation of the HalSTAR systems model of sustainability

13. Examples of UK sustainability policy mapped onto the adapted HalSTAR wheel

14. How stakeholders influence the project?
Side-effects
“The triangle –
performance”
Sustainability
1. P
process
2.P
product
3. P - People/Social – personal and/or global
4.P - Planet/Ecological - personal and/or global
5.P -Profit/Economical - personal and/or global
Institutional - personal and/or global
Culture and context
The project
Endogeneous
Internal Stakeholders
External Stakeholders
Exogeneous

15. Current evaluation approaches
Evaluating the total impact of stakeholders in relation to the project requires more than identifying the impact level and probability of impact. (…..)
Project managers need to assess the stakeholder attributes and classes (Mitchell et al. , 1997), and their position towards the project (Cleland, 1986; Winch and Bonke, 2002)—are they opponents or proponents?
Stakeholder atributes (Olander):
value (A) = power x legitimacy x urgency
position value (Pos)
interest–impact index (ViII),
Evaluation - stakeholder impact index (SII) as a function of A, Pos and ViII.

16. Stakeholder measurements

17. External stakeholder network
Elements /Nodes/Constructs – external stakeholders
Connections
Internal – within the network
External
to 5P
To context, culture and policy makers
Possible tools :
Causal/cognitive mapping
Social Network analysis
ANP – analytical network process

18. Stakeholder’s interaction characteristics - attributes
Can be increased or decreased by the mutual stakeholder interactions
1. Power – the ability to change the process (1 to 5)
What gives the power to the stakeholders
Inherent
Legal power
Political power
Social capital
Business power/capital (money, hiring,….)
Inherited
Due to administrative flaws
due to media influence
Informaniveness
2. Grade of Interest – willingness to engage (1 to 5) Likert scale
3. Attitude – positive or negative (-3 to-1 and+1 to+3) Stapel scale

19. Proposed Stakeholder’s measurement characteristics - attributes
Power x Attitude – from -5 to 5 (it cannot be zero)
2. Proximity = 1/(Power x Grade of interest)
From 0,04 to 0,2
3. Attitude/Power x Grade of interest (???) = attitude x proximity = stakeholder value
-0,2 to -0,04 or 0,04 to 0,2
NB: Are only 1 and 2 needed? Instead of fixing such closed form expressions, why not let non linear regression determine the actual formulas???
OK, we could do that too but we do not have all data values.

20. Interactions between external (?) stakeholders
Frequency of interaction /communication (1-5) NB: It has been shown that frequency alone is a poor measure – yes, but this is why we will combine it with other measures
Type of interactions – cooperation vs. Competition
For each stakeholder (this is specific to each stakeholder and assymmetric) - Yes, that was the intention (Modified Likert)
Cooperation +5
Coopetition
Competition -5

21. Example of the network representation
Frequency S1 S1 S2 S3 S4
s1,2
s1,3
s1,4
s2,1
s2,3
s2,4
s3,1
s4,1
s3,4
s4,2
s4,3
S2,1
S1,3
S1,2
S3,1 S3 S2
S4,3
S2,4
S3,4
S4,2 S4
Nature of relationship S1 S2 S3 S4
s1,2
s1,3
s1,4
s2,1
s2,3
s2,4
s3,1
s4,1
s3,4
s4,2
s4,3

22. How external stakeholders influenced the process, product and 3P (
How external stakeholders influenced the process, product and 3P (?-too general) – it is aggregated
Process
Product
Planet
People
Profit
Institutional
Int.
Ext.
Stak 1
Stak 2
Stak 3
Stak 4
Stak 5
Answering the question how will lead to influence and impact cluster
This is the framework to obtain the information based on slide 6

23. External stakeholders impact to time, cost and 3P (
External stakeholders impact to time, cost and 3P (?-too general) – it is aggregated
Exceeding Cost
Time delays
Scope
Planet
People
Profit
Institutional
Int.
Ext.
1-5 (%)
1-5
+ how
Stak 1
Stak 2
Stak 3
Stak 4
Stak 5
This is the framework to obtain the information based on slide 6

24. OMEGA - Adapted HalSTAR wheel

25. OMEGA - Adapted HalSTAR wheel

26. Social network metrics INTRODUCTION TO THE FORMAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL NETWORKS USING MATHEMATICA by Luis R. Izquierdo, Robert A. Hanneman
Network size – how limited resources each actor may have for building and maintaining ties
Network density – speed of information, social capital/constrains, connectivity of the network Degree of actors – in-degree and out-degree (the influence)
Social distance between actors (between two of them)
Walks, cycles, trails and paths
Eccentricity of actor – between diameter and radius

27. Social network metrics
Network conectivity
Clustering coeficijent of a node
to which the friends of my friends are my friends
clustering coefficient for the entire network
the average of the clustering coefficients of all the nodes
Centrality of a node – measure of its structural importance based on
degree - having more ties means being more important
closeness, - who are able to reach other actors at shorter path lengths, or who are more reachable by others
Betweenness - being in between many other actors what makes an actor central

28. Megaproject stakeholder network metrics
New network metrics will be developed combining these network metrics with values of actors atributes and types of relationships for:
Network characteristics
The role in the network - importance
Communication and Clustering patterns for C-C clustres
Impact on the project with respect to the stakeholder metrics

29. Stakeholder’s involvement
Are external stakeholder’s representatives involved in regular meetings
Are external stakeholders engaged in plannig stage of the project
Is there a modification of the project introduced under the remarks of stakeholder
Actions taken to support the project by external stakeholders
Actions taken against the project external stakeholders
Media attitude
Legal framework and practice of public consultations
Is there a continuous commuinication with external stakeholders

30. RESULTS How stakeholders impact the project?
Project performance and impact
How stakeholders impact the project?
How to measure stakeholder involment?
Stakeholder network
How the stakeholders interact?
How project context and culture influence stakeholder’s behaviour?
Groups of Megaprojects with consistent cultural & contextual attributes

31. References on sustainability and stakeholders
Commission Communication of 15 May 2001 ‘A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development’
This strategy provides an EU-wide policy framework to deliver sustainable development, i.e. to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It rests on four separate pillars – economic, social, environmental and global governance – which need to reinforce one another.
Chinyo, E., Olomolaiye, P. (2010). Construction Stakeholder Management. Wiley-Blackwell, p. 17, 68
Epstein, M.J., Roy, M-J. (2001). Sustainability in Action: Identifying and Measuring the Key Performance Drivers, Long Range Planning 34 (2001) 585–604, p. 588
Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman, p. 5-6, 12
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L. i de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder Theory; The State of the Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Friedman, A. L. i Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olander, S. (2006). External Stakeholder Analysis in Construction Project Management. Lund University.
Olander, S. (2007). Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project management. Construction Management and Economics (March 2007) 25, 277–287
Olander, S., Landin, A. (2008) A comparative study of factors affecting the external stakeholder management process. Construction Management and Economics.
Olander, S., Atkin, B. Stakeholder Management – The Gains and Pains. In Chinyo, E., Olomolaiye, P. (2010). Construction Stakeholder Management. Wiley-Blackwell,
Olander, S., Landin, A. (2005). Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects. International Journal of Project Management 23 (2005) 321–328.
L.S. Smutko, S.H. Klimek, C.A. Perrin, and L.E. Danielson, Involving Watershed Stakeholders: An Issue-Attribute Approach to Determine Willingness and Need (willingness – attached)
L-F Pau, with Kristian Jääskeläinen, “ERP project’s Internal Stakeholder network and how it influences the project’s outcome”, Working paper, SSRN, July 2009, under publication
L-F Pau, Discovering the dynamics of smart business networks, Proc Smart Business network conference, Beijing, May 2008, ; and: Computational Management Science, March 2013, DOI: /s x
L-F Pau, P. Vervest, E. van Heck, K. Preiss, Smart business networks (Eds), Springer, Berlin, ISBN: , 2005,442 p.
UCLA- Omega centre, Centre for Mega Projects in Transport and Development, Incorporating Principles of Sustainable Development within the Design and Delivery of Major Projects: An international study with particular reference to Major Infrastructure Projects for the Institution of Civil Engineers and the Actuarial Profession, November 2010