Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part IGuiding Principles
- Part IIDeviating from Plans
- Part IIIPractical Tips
- Chapter 13Setting Realistic Project Goals
- Chapter 14At the Brink of a Project
- Chapter 15The Roles of Governance Mechanisms to Manage Misbehaviors in the Project Front-End
- Chapter 16Coping with Changes to the Plan
- Chapter 17Project Behavior, Disruptions, and the Antifragility Spectrum
- Chapter 18Curbing Cost Increases and Benefit Shortfalls
- Afterword
- Index
- References
Afterword
A Fundamental Problem with Projects or Project Management?
from Part III - Practical Tips
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 November 2025
Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part IGuiding Principles
- Part IIDeviating from Plans
- Part IIIPractical Tips
- Chapter 13Setting Realistic Project Goals
- Chapter 14At the Brink of a Project
- Chapter 15The Roles of Governance Mechanisms to Manage Misbehaviors in the Project Front-End
- Chapter 16Coping with Changes to the Plan
- Chapter 17Project Behavior, Disruptions, and the Antifragility Spectrum
- Chapter 18Curbing Cost Increases and Benefit Shortfalls
- Afterword
- Index
- References
Summary
I read all the chapters, essential for engaging in an Afterword. I engaged as a sociological social theorist, long interested in power relations in organizations, who has contributed to the field of management and organization studies but currently works in a School of Project Management. I first encountered projects in the work of Alfred Schütz, as undergraduate reading in sociological theory. His phenomenological understanding of projects grounds much of my thinking about them. I conceptualized the role of contracts in projects as a form of coding that seeks to impose standing conditions on an open system in order to try and make it stable and closed. In a word, contracts work as autopoiesis. The endeavour is always in vain wherever events intrude. It is from this perspective that I review the ‘Five Hands’ debate. I regard the debate sociologically as a series of accounts. In doing this, some curious causality is revealed. From these auspices the chapter proceeds to discuss the central debate as a battlefield of ideas. It does so prior to considering each chapter in terms of the framing advanced. Finally, seven conclusions reposition project management studies, encapsulate the argument of the Afterword.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior , pp. 301 - 323Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Archer, M. S. (1996). Social integration and system integration: Developing the distinction. Sociology, 30(4), 679–699.10.1177/0038038596030004004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archer, M. S. (1982). Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action. The British Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 455–483.10.2307/589357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berti, M., Simpson, A., Pina e Cunha, M., and Clegg, S. R. (2021). Elgar introduction to organizational paradox theory. Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjørkeng, K., Clegg, S. R., and Pitsis, T. (2009). Becoming a practice. Management Learning 40(2), 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantarelli, C., and Genovese, A. (2023). Innovation potential of megaprojects: A systematic literature review. Production, Planning and Control, 34(14) 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caro, R. A. (2015). The power broker: Robert Moses and the fall of New York. Random House.Google Scholar
Clegg, S. R. ([1975] 2013). Power, rule and domination: A critical and empirical understanding of power in sociological theory and organizational life. Routledge and Kegan Paul, International Library of Sociology. Republished in Routledge Library Editions: Organization: Theory & Behaviour, vol. 6.10.4324/9780203385432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S. R., Pitsis, T, and Mount, M. (2025) Managing and organizations: An introduction to theory and practice, 7th ed. Sage.Google Scholar
Clegg, S., and Ninan, J. (2023). Unravelling governmentality in project ecologies. Project Leadership and Society, 4, 100099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S., Loosemore, M., Walker, D., van Marrewijk, A., and Sankaran, S. (2023). Construction cultures: Sources, signs and solutions of toxicity (pp. 3–16). In Addyman, S. and Smyth, H. (eds.). Construction project organising. Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S., Sarkar, S, Waldman-Brown, A., and Roy, R. (2023). Socialized leadership and improvisational responding to COVID-19 supply voids. Project Leadership and Society, 100088.10.1016/j.plas.2023.100088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S. R., Pitsis, T., Rura-Polley, T., and Marosszeky, M. (2002). Governmentality matters: Designing an alliance culture of inter-organizational collaboration for managing projects. Organization Studies, 23(3), 317–337.10.1177/0170840602233001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., and Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, F., Kuhn, T., Cornelissen, J. P., and Clark, T. (2011). Communication, organizing and organization: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 32(9), 1149–1170.10.1177/0170840611410836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunha, M. P. e., Neves, P., Clegg, S. R., and Rego, A. (2016). Tales of the unexpected: Discussing improvisational learning, Management Learning, 46(5), 511–529.10.1177/1350507614549121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czarniawska, B. (2007). Shadowing: And other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Copenhagen Business School Press DK.Google Scholar
Dalcher, D. (2020). In whose interest? Repositioning the stakeholder paradox. Advances in Project Management Series, PM World Journal, 9(9), 1–9.Google Scholar
de Vaujany, F. X., Gherardi, S., and Silva, P. (2024). Organization studies and posthumanism. Routledge.10.4324/9781032617169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deroy, X. (2024). Posthumanism as a system of codifying events (pp. 101–126). In de Vaujany, F. X., Gherardi, S., and Silva, P. (eds.). Organization studies and posthumanism. Routledge.10.4324/9781032617169-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dille, T., Soderlund, J., and Clegg, S. R. (2018). Temporal conditioning and institutional pluralism: Exploring the nature and dynamics of inter-institutional temporary organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 36, 673–686.10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, L. (1987). Strategy and structural adjustment to regain fit and performance: In defence of contingency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 24(1), 1–24.10.1111/j.1467-6486.1987.tb00444.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and power: Democracy in practice. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., and Sunstein, C. R. (2016). The principle of the Malevolent Hiding Hand; or the Planning Fallacy writ large. Social Research, 83(4), 979–1004.10.1353/sor.2016.0063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaim, M., Clegg, S. R., Cunha, M. P. e, and Berti., M. (2022). Organizational paradox. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009128155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaim, M., Clegg, S., and Cunha, M. P. E. (2022). In praise of paradox persistence: Evidence from the Sydney Opera House Project. Project Management Journal, 53(4), 397–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.10.2307/256496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haselton, M. G., Nettle, D., and Murray, D. R. (2015). The evolution of cognitive bias (pp. 1–20). In Buss, D. (ed.). The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Wiley.Google Scholar
Ika, L. A., Love, P. E. D., and Pinto, J. K. (2022). Moving beyond the Planning Fallacy: The emergence of a new principle of project behavior. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 3310–3325.10.1109/TEM.2020.3040526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, K. (2019). Whistleblowing: Toward a new theory. Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674239715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreiner, K. (2020). Conflicting notions of a project: The battle between Albert O. Hirschman and Bent Flyvbjerg. Project Management Journal, 51, 400–410.10.1177/8756972820930535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenfle, S., and Loch, C. (2017). Has megaproject management lost its way (pp. 21–38). In Flyvbjerg, B. (ed.). The Oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, S., Martens, K., and Van Der Heijden, R. (2016). Agent-based models and self-organisation: Addressing common criticisms and the role of agent-based modelling in urban planning. Town Planning Review, 87(3), 321–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linstead, S., and Thanem, T. (2007). Virtuality and 0rganization: The contribution of Gilles Deleuze. Organization Studies, 28(10), 1483–1496.10.1177/0170840607075675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maturana, H. R., and Varela, F. J. (1991). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Meyer, A. D. (1982). Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 515–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, A. D., Brooks, G. R., and Goes, J. B. (1990). Environmental jolts and industry revolutions: Organizational responses to discontinuous change. Strategic Management Journal, 93–110.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. W., and Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.10.1086/226550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morujão, C. (2023). Subjective meanings and normative values in Alfred Schutz’s philosophy of human action. Phenomenology and Mind, 24, 130–139.10.17454/pam-2410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ninan, J., Clegg, S. R., and Mahalingnan, A. (2021). Power in news media: Framing strategies and effects in infrastructure projects. International Journal of Project Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ninan, J., Mahalingam, A., and Clegg, S. (2020). Power and strategies in the external stakeholder management of megaprojects: A circuitry framework, Engineering Project Organization Journal, 9, https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2020.00104.Google Scholar
Pitsis, T., Clegg, S. R., Marosszeky, M., and Rura-Polley, T. (2003). Constructing the Olympic dream: Managing innovation through the future perfect. Organization Science, 14(5), 574–590.10.1287/orsc.14.5.574.16762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, O. (2024). The crisis of culture: Identity politics and the empire of norms. Hurst.10.1093/oso/9780197782514.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockwood, D. (1964). Social integration and system integration (pp. 244–257). In Zollschan, G. K. and Hirsch, W. (eds.). Explorations in social change. Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (1996). Social practices: A Wittgensteinian approach to human activity and the social. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511527470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. Pennsylvania State University Press.10.1515/9780271023717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütz, A. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Silverman, D. (2024). Interpreting qualitative research. Sage.10.4135/9781036233358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockstrom, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B, and Sorlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 1259855.10.1126/science.1259855CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaagaasar, A. L., Hernes, T., and Dille, T. (2020). The challenges of implementing temporal shifts in temporary organizations: Implications of a situated temporal view. Project Management Journal, 51(4), 420–428.10.1177/8756972820931276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Marrewijk, A. H., Veenswijk, M., and Clegg, S. R. (2010). Organizing reflexivity in designed change: The ethnoventionist approach. Journal of Change Management, 23(3), 212–229.Google Scholar
van Marrewijk, A., and van den Ende, L. (2022). Shaping interorganizational strategic projects through power relations and strategic practices. International Journal of Project Management, 40(4), 426–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wensing, E. (2020). The destruction of Juukan Gorge: Lessons for planners and local governments. Australian Planner, 56(4), 241–248.10.1080/07293682.2020.1866045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenzel, M., and Stjerne, I. S. (2021). Heuristics-in-use: Toward a practice theory of organizational heuristics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164(7), 120517. DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120517.10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whyte, J., Naderpajouh, N., Clegg, S., Matous, P., Pollack, J., and Crawford, L. (2022). Project leadership: A research agenda for a changing world. Project Leadership and Society, 3, 100044.10.1016/j.plas.2022.100044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1958). The blue and brown books: Preliminary studies for the “philosophical investigations.” Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.