No abstract

No abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to situate project portfolio management practice and explore its improvisational nature. The overall aim is to deepen the knowledge of what project portfolio managers do when they manage portfolios based on an organizational theory perspective.Design/methodology/approachThis research explores the situated actions of project portfolio managers managing project portfolios and is based on two different case studies. The approach is qualitative and interpretative, with the aim of gradually developing an understanding.FindingsThe primary contributions in this paper are insights that enhance the understanding of project portfolio management practice, and the differences in practice between portfolio managers and project managers when creating “action space” and improvising. This knowledge is important for both project theory and project practice, for example when developing managerial competences and sense making structures as well as organizational design in order to increase competitiveness. The findings also contribute to project theory in relation to research on the “Practice Turn” and the literature on re‐situating projects.Research limitations/implicationsThe research implications emphasize the need for a better understanding of project portfolio management in practice, and an awareness of the need of uncertainty management executed by the portfolio managers situated actions (i.e. fulfilled by walk‐tour and circle communication).Practical implicationsThe practical implications are an awareness of the fact that project‐based organizational settings have to emphasize a holistic approach and acknowledge the need for situated leadership (in particular for their project portfolio managers).Originality/valueThis paper fulfills an identified need to study situated project portfolio management practice.

PurposeTraditional construction project practice has been based on rigid and impermeable boundaries that have made communication, cooperation and integration a major challenge. However, new collaborative approaches have been developed. This paper aims at adding to knowledge on projects‐as‐practice by interpreting findings from a case study on a contemporary collaborative construction project. The purpose of this paper is to provide knowledge about organizational development in the project‐based construction industry by identifying boundary actions in contemporary collaborative construction practices.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on an exploratory longitudinal case study approach covering both early design phase and the following production phase, including interviews, participant observation at formal meetings and informal gatherings and internal and external documents. Thus, the methodology used is triangulation and the analysis has followed an interpretative process.FindingsThe paper provides empirical insights into three examples of boundary actions of a collaborative construction project: stakeholder boundary action, professional boundary action and geographical boundary action. From a project‐as‐practice perspective, these boundary actions turn out to be interesting renewal initiatives, providing increased understanding of where and how renewal can take place.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings are based on a single case study and more research on this area is needed. However, the paper shows examples of boundary actions in a contemporary project and thus adds to the knowledge on contemporary projects‐as‐practice.Practical implicationsThe paper provides implications for construction project managers on examples of renewal arenas.Originality/valueThe paper is exploratory and the findings are important for much needed development and renewal of the construction industry.

No abstract