A project as a workplace

JPMA-01696; No of Pages 11

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx – xxx www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

A project as a workplace Observations from project managers in four R&D and project-intensive companies Kristina Palm a,b,⁎, Marcus Lindahl c a

KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Industrial Management, Sweden Karolinska Institutet, LIME, Medical Management Centre, Sweden Uppsala University, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Sweden b

c

Received 9 January 2014; received in revised form 25 September 2014; accepted 7 October 2014

Abstract Projects and project management work present what would seem to be a paradox. Although business and industrial companies regard projects as strategic vehicles for innovation and growth, it is doubtful whether project managers are seen as a similarly strategic asset, due to their working environment. This article, which is based on interviews conducted at four major Scandinavian companies, describes several empirical cases of a project as a workplace. In line with previous research we observe a challenging and in many cases exposed situation for many project managers. Our main finding is that a considerable part of what makes up a non-sustainable project work environment stems from the imbalance of power that exists between permanent and temporary organisational forms. The article concludes that a process of “deprojectification” of project employees, i.e. making the distinction between line and project work less distinct in organisations may actually lead to more sustainable project work. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved. Keywords: Project managers; Project as workplace; Permanent organisation; Temporary organisation; Sustainable work

1. Introduction Contemporary economic thought in the Western industrialised world claims that innovation is the driving force behind prosperity and competitiveness. The organisational structure for innovation is generally project-based whereby projects are viewed as the primary strategic organisational vehicle (e.g., Friis Sommer et al., 2014; Söderlund and Bredin, 2006). A project is a temporary organisation (e.g., Lundin and Söderholm, 1995) that is “regarded as a suitable organization form to carry out complex, novel and knowledge-intensive tasks, often in interdisciplinary staff assignments” (Hanisch and Wald, 2013, pp. 1). Projects in R&D are, e.g., associated with creative (Hobday, 2000; Maier and Branzei, 2014) and innovative work (Artto et al., 2011; ⁎ Corresponding author at: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Industrial Management, Sweden. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Palm).

Cicmil et al, 2009). They are thus generally of utmost strategic importance. Research discoveries, the invention and introduction of new products and services, and breakthroughs in organisational processes are all often the result of projects (e.g., Friis Sommer et al., 2014). Thus, projects are increasingly seen as the postindustrial force behind production of value, but also important for employment creation and individual career trajectories (see, e.g., Ekstedt et al., 1999; Gann and Salter, 2000; Hobday, 2000; Lundin and Hartman, 2000). However, this kind of project work, while stimulating, may also make severe demands, even to the point of posing risks to the health and wellbeing of project workers (e.g., Dellve and Stjernberg, 2008; Lindgren and Packendorff, 2008). Projects are very common in all areas of society today. As sustainable ability to innovate lies at the core of many corporation, projects are strategically important both as vehicles for innovation but also as a workplace. They employ many people, often in challenging tasks, but at the same time risk the wellbeing of the staff. We focus on project managers since they themselves are

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002 0263-7863/00 © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved. Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

2

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

an exposed group in between the project and the permanent organization (Clegg and Courpasson, 2004), but also because their wellbeing is important for the health (Skakon et al., 2010) and working environment (Hall, 2007) of their employees. Our aim is to explore the status of temporary projects embedded in line organisations as a workplace for project managers. This paper starts out by firstly examining the imbalance between projects and permanent organisations, and presenting a brief review of project management, motivation and stress. Secondly, the method is described including a brief description of the similarities between the companies in the study. Thirdly, the interview findings are presented, analysed and discussed. Finally, the paper ends with a conclusion, including a call for the “deprojectification” of organisations. 1.1. Projects as weak organisational units compared to line units Projects are temporary organisational forms with unique features that set them apart from permanent organisational forms. Although there is no broadly accepted definition of a temporary organisation, in their literature review, Hanisch and Wald (2013) identify five main characteristics that differentiate the temporary organisational form from the permanent organisational form: temporariness vs. permanence, uniqueness vs. repetition, heterogeneity/diversity vs. homogeneity, informal vs. formal coordination, and ambiguous hierarchies vs. clear lines of command. We elaborate upon these characteristics with relation to the imbalance between projects and permanent organisational units next. The concept of time is fundamental to understanding the temporary organisational form because its duration is limited, whether for the long or short term (Bakker, 2010; MaaninenOlsson and Müllern, 2009). Temporary organisations typically begin with a formal “kick-off” event and end with a deadline by which date the whole task has to have been completed (Bakker, 2010). Being temporary, the project has little time to become institutional with respect to, for instance, the stable structures of power and influence over decisions and resources that may challenge and balance the permanent organisation. Temporary organisations are established to tackle a specific task within a specific timeframe (Lundin and Söderholm, 1995), such tasks are often more complex and non-routine (i.e. unique) than tasks performed by permanent organisations (Bechky, 2006; Cattani et al., 2011). While a temporary organisation is effective at achieving clear targets, it underperforms for the same reason in terms of creating stable decision-making and organisational structures. In addition, temporary organisations with their specific projects not only cut through organisational departments and hierarchies but also across organisational boundaries, something which may also weaken them with regard to organisational power and influence compared to the stable and distinct line organisational unit. The coordination of a temporary organisation is based less on formal mechanisms and requires more informal and interpersonal coordination mechanisms (Bechky, 2006; Hanisch and Wald, 2013; Janowicz-Panjaitan et al., 2009; Pauget and Wald, 2013). Project management standards and methods have been developed to compensate for the lack of formal structures in temporary

organisations, and some scholars argue that projects are not necessarily less hierarchical, less structured and less bureaucratic than the work of permanent organisations (Clegg and Courpasson, 2004; Hodgson, 2004). There is even research that suggests that the effectiveness of formal coordination in project management may be limited, and even in fact that project management may hinder change and innovativeness due to its inherent bureaucracy (Cicmil et al., 2009; Maylor, 2001). Projects are often temporary organisations embedded in permanent organisations (Bakker, 2010) and, as such, are often in a so-called matrix where business functions are performed both in separate projects and in functional organisational lines (Hobday, 2000). A temporary organisation is often dependent on a permanent organisation, but at the same time it often has a certain degree of autonomy according to the literature (Sundstrom et al., 1990). As project workers may also hold various hierarchical positions and have various tasks outside the temporary organisation (Baccarini, 1996; Packendorff, 1995), project managers have to coordinate the activities of project workers who also report to their line managers. Work assignment conflicts may arise due to the dual work roles of project workers (Jones and Deckro, 1993), over which project managers, de facto, have little control. Therefore, a project manager in a temporary organisation may have less formal power and authority than a manager in a permanent organisation. 1.2. Project management, motivation and stress Previous survey-based studies (Dwivedula and Bredillet, 2010; Seiler et al. 2012) indicate that the key motivational factors for project management can be found in the task, team, resources, empowerment and personal development. These findings hardly deviate from what we assume of work motivation in general (e.g., Ambrose and Kulik, 1999). People like to work, have meaningful and challenging objectives, work with engaged and likeminded people, have influence over decision-making and resource allocation that affect their work. They also tend to appreciate opportunities that allow them to grow personally and professionally. Projects are generally challenging in a positive manner (even if their goal may also be frustratingly unclear) (e.g., Lundin and Söderholm, 1995) and teams are often tightly knit communities with strong collegial bonds (Bakker, 2010). However, with regard to the latter factors, project work can actually be surmised to have a negative impact. Several studies indicate that project managers often feel that they lack formal (or informal) authority, influence over decisions and resource allocation (Clegg and Courpasson, 2004). A common, and alarming, theme in the literature on project work is the description of project management as a position that is characterised in many respects by a poor working environment. Researchers claim that project work, despite its stimulating nature and challenges, involves tight schedules, cost constraints, manpower shortages, lack of worker control and insufficient feedback (e.g., Pinto et al., 2014). With regard to the project manager's vulnerable position, researchers have observed aspects such as de-motivation (Dwivedula and Bredillet, 2010; Schmid and Adams, 2008); stress (Gällstedt, 2003; Jensen et al., 2013); life and work imbalance (Cicmil et al., 2009); and work

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

dissatisfaction (Sveiby, 1997). Other studies have addressed project workers' and particularly project managers' lack of career paths and development (Bredin and Söderlund, 2013; El-Sabaa, 2001; Hölzle, 2010; Larsen, 2002; Parker and Skitmore, 2005). Hölzle, for example, describes the need for clear career paths for project managers as well as the trend towards more interorganisational career moves as opposed to traditional intraorganisational career moves by such managers. This trend is explained, first, by an increase in the network-based career paths of managers in post-industrial organisations, and, second, by a dissatisfaction with career opportunities in traditional organisations (Demers, 2001; Huemann et al., 2007; Parker and Skitmore, 2005;). However, most of these studies focus on the interior project environment, that is, the project work, rather than on a project as a workplace embedded in the line organisation. 2. Method Our article, which is based on 60 in-depth interviews at four major Scandinavian companies, describes several cases where the organisational form used for innovation was projects (cf. Legard et al., 2003; Miller and Glassner, 2011). Using fictitious names, we identify these four companies as The Steel Company, The Medtech Company, The Telecom Company and The Big Electric Company. We selected these companies because they work with research and development (R&D) in projects. As these companies are involved in R&D of one kind or another, their project experience with innovation is comparable at a certain level. The composition of the 60 interviews is presented in the following Table 1. Although the companies studied were organised in different ways, it is possible to outline a general project organisational chart: the projects are based in a permanent division, often R&D, where a project manager is assigned to a specific project. He or she will have other team members enrolled as specialists, either from the R&D division or from other divisions such as production, purchasing or marketing. In many cases these team members serve several projects or perform line work part-time. This means that many team members will work in a matrix structure with several superiors such as the project manager and the divisional manager. Depending on how much time is allocated to a specific project (part or full time) the project manager can act as the dominant superior. However, project managers have no formal staff responsibility with respect to salaries and personal career development for instance. The first author conducted interviews at The Medtech Company, The Steel Company and The Telecom Company. The Table 1 Composition of interviews. The number of women is presented in brackets. Role

Total no.

Steel

Medtech

Telecom

Big electric

Project managers Project Workers Non-project workers HRM professionals Managers TOTALT

11 (2) 19 (5) 10 (2) 3 (3) 17 (3) 60 (15)

2 (2) 3 (1) 2 (1) 1 (1) 2 (1) 10 (6)

2 2 2 1 4 11

2 (0) 7 (4) 0 1 (1) 3 (1) 13 (6)

5 (0) 7 (0) 6 (0) 0 8 (1) 26 (1)

• Female within brackets.

(0) (0) (1) (1) (0) (2)

3

goal was to understand how sustainable work, i.e. both human and economic sustainable work, could be managed in work-intensive settings. The second author gathered data related to recently completed R&D projects from several organisational units at The Big Electric Company. Our interviews, which were open-ended (see Yin, 2003) and semi-structured, permitted the interviewees to offer their own reflections. Such an interview format allows the interviewee to explain uncertainties and to express surprise, discomfort, wellbeing, etc. The interviews, each of which lasted from 1.5 to 2 h, were conducted in the interviewees' offices. We recorded the interviews and later transcribed them. With few exceptions, the comments quoted below are from interviews with project managers and they have been translated from Swedish into English. Because the main focus of our research is the eleven project managers, we made a thematic analysis of their comments as a group highlighting descriptions of projects as temporary workplaces for project managers in permanent organisations. We used the other 49 interviews to support our understanding of project work as a whole. Owing to the number of interviews conducted and the breadth of work positions of the various interviewees, we think our research methodology provides us with a fruitful opportunity to analyse project work in a contemporary industrial R&D context. 2.1. The four companies The four companies in this research can be described as a “balanced matrix” in which the line functions of the permanent organisation and project management have joint responsibility for, and authority over, each project (cf. Hobday, 2000). The projects we studied at the four companies had complex, highly technical systems that had as their goal the production of business-to-business capital goods, often designed for a specific customer (cf. ibid.). The Steel Company develops new metallic materials for various tools (e.g., drilling tools) and new knowledge for use in future projects. Both the number of project members and the project timespan vary by project. Most of the R&D engineers in this particular department work at the same location in close proximity to the blue-collar technical staff as they test the new alloys. They sell their products both nationally and internationally. The Medtech Company develops new medical products and modifies their existing products with new innovations. They market their products to hospitals worldwide. Their projects vary in size and timespan. For example, a three-year project may involve 40 project workers while a pre-project may only entail one worker and be of a much shorter length. Most of the company's R&D engineers work at the same location, sometimes with engineers from other Swedish or foreign locations. There is a designated department for project managers. The Telecom Company develops new generations for mobile communications. We studied one major project with numerous project workers assigned to various subprojects and project teams located in two Swedish cities and one city in Canada. The subprojects, with a timespan of six months, have

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

4

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

some eight to ten workers. The project managers have their own department. The Big Electric Company develops new products (e.g., high voltage transmissions and generation technology) and, refines existing products in order to increase efficiency and reduce costs. The R&D engineers work at the same location in project teams. However, there may be interrelated projects at other locations. Typically, a project lasts from 6 to 36 months, with one to ten project workers. 2.2. The interview findings We present our interview findings as five “stories” that describe important aspects of a project as a workplace. The first story, “The Hypocrisy of the Gate Model”, describes the competing agendas of line and project management. The second story, “Doing Line Work — A Source of Conflict”, describes how these competing agendas cause conflict and frustration. The third, fourth and fifth stories, “The ‘Promotion’ to Project Manager,” “The Project Cycle and the Stage Model as an Accelerating Source of Stress”, and “Project Management Turnover and Turnover Intentions” respectively, describe the difficulties a project manager faces when line and project management conflict. See Fig. 1 that illustrates the linear and cyclical relationships between the five stories relevant to the theme “a temporary project as a workplace within a permanent organisation”. 2.2.1. The hypocrisy of the gate model The gate model, in its various forms, is a traditional management tool used by project management groups to control, monitor and evaluate project performance. Major companies use several variants of the model, in particular for R&D projects. In general, the model divides a project into stages or phases (e.g., feasibility analysis to final testing and manufacturing) separated by gates. At each gate the project manager or management group decides whether and when to continue the process (c.f. e.g., Maylor, 2010.) As an example, The Big Electric Company controls, monitors and evaluates development projects using quite strict variants of the gate model. Many work packages receive a “green” light meaning proceed, other phases receive a cautionary “yellow” light meaning “pass with action items”, and some packages may receive a “red” light meaning halt the project. In the latter case, the project should remain in the ongoing stage until it is ready to pass the gate and proceed. In addition to the project manager, an external assessor is involved in the project continuation decision (in particular, for the larger projects) in theory at least. In practice, however, upper management may exert pressure in order to accelerate the project to completion. Sometimes this pressure may lead to overly optimistic decisions (i.e. a “red” is converted into a “yellow” light) about a project's completion phase. In some instances, a staff shortage bottleneck may be the end result when workers have to deal with the action items at the same time as they are working towards the next gate. The following exchange between a researcher (R) and a project assessor (PA) at The Big Electric Company, Project D, reveals this pressure:

R: There's one aspect of the gate model structure, and then there's, especially in this case, a great deal of pressure to bring this product to market. Orders from potential foreign businesses, among other things, created pressure… PA: Yes, there's political pressure when you have to pass a certain gate by a specific date. There'll be a loss of prestige if you haven't passed that gate. R: How does it feel as an assessor if you have to be one of those [bad guys]? The pressure must be felt by anyone who's forced to be, if I've understood things correctly, an independent reviewer of the entire process. It must be quite tough. PA: This particular gate passage was set before I was involved. An assessor would've been able to highlight the items that remained. R: What happens if the light is red? Can you formally pass a gate if you have a red light? PA: Yes, you can. It's a trade off, passing the gates when items remain that may affect whether you pass through the gate or not. Normally, when we pass through a gate, we draw up a list of items pending. In addition, project managers claim that some gate decisions are made informally, outside the gate decision meetings. Prior to gate decision meetings, project managers may have informal conversations with key group members in order to influence the decisions. A project manager at The Telecom Company stated: ‘If we're going to get the decision we want, then we often have to put all our energy into negotiating with key people before the meeting’. On such occasions, the meeting often becomes more of a formality. There are practical reasons for this procedure: the project management group meeting is not a good forum for discussion due to the number of members and because only a few minutes are allocated for each gate decision. The following comments by a project manager at The Medtech Company suggest that there is an ulterior reason for the procedure: And then, for some reason, it's the line managers in this huge organisation who try to control the projects. Yes, [project managers] should report to the PSG [Project Steering Committee] … who meet on a monthly basis. I'm usually rather nervous before these meetings. Now I'm quite angry. It [this situation] really is a great source of stress for project managers. And … the situation becomes rather strange in that people who haven't got any experience of this [project] … tell us how to run the project. And then we, the project managers, have to take responsibility for that later on. It's very strange. It's like a review. You're sitting in the centre among the line managers where you present the project. There's an unspoken rule that you're supposed to

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

dress formally in a suit and tie. But they [the line managers] are not in suits and ties. They sit there writing emails on their iPhones and make distracted posts that may have a really huge impact on the project and on people's jobs. But when the projects are big, my project, for example, will cost 10 million [Euro], then this group of people becomes a little nervous. Then you see that there is a management team, the real management team of which the CEO is a member and, for example, [my boss]. That's where the real decisions are made. This [PSG meeting] is just project theatre. (Project Manager 1, The Medtech Company) Despite these problems, some project managers recognize the benefit that the project management group brings to the gate decisions. For example, a project manager at Steel Company said that the project management committee is able to take a holistic view in a way that a single project manager is not. They [the PSG] can take a helicopter view. It may be that there are other things involved that you don't really have any insight into, but you're there and can speak about your own interests and the requirements of the project. Naturally, there may be other circumstances where it's smarter to choose a different path. […] I think it works very well. (Project Manager, The Steel Company) Ultimately, the projects must be completed on schedule. That is the basis on which projects, and project managers, are evaluated. Yes, in the end […] it's the original plan that counts. There may be differences that affect the outcome, but you can reach an agreement. You [as project manager] are evaluated in terms of the original plan. I don't know whether they do a follow up of you both as an individual and as an organisation. However, we have copies of this [documentation on the project] and there are no excuses whatsoever…

the evaluation has a kind of value even if unplanned things happen. This means that if you don't meet your time plan then something's wrong. It's the project manager's responsibility to meet the time plans. It feels like a responsibility, it is perceived as a responsibility, and you have to shoulder that responsibility. That's clear. (Project Manager 2, The Medtech Company) In summary, the projects were obliged to follow a formal strict gate model, but in actual fact important decisions were often discussed and made in the permanent line organisation itself in an informal manner by upper management. We see this as an example of how a project manager is “bullied” in that he/she is held accountable for the progress made in a project but is denied the opportunity to influence the decisions that will have a strong impact on the project's operational environment. 2.2.2. Doing line work — a source of conflict An example from The Big Electric Company illustrates how the line management of the permanent organisational form dominates the project management of the temporary organisational form. In the example, the prospect of a large foreign order caused the sales department to get involved in the project. As a result, the project timeframe was compressed, and new tasks were assigned to the project workers. The following exchange between a researcher (R) and a project manager (PM) at The Big Electric Company reveals this conflict: R: Why did it take such a long time to lock in the design? PM: That's because we lost focus. In the autumn, they [management] could tell that the outcome trials were going in the right direction with the prototype material. Then they [management] saw that [foreign country] could make a whopping sale at the beginning of the following year. They [management] initiated the prototype samples so that we

The Hypocrisy of the Gate Model

Doing Line Work – Source of Conflict The Temporary Organisaon

5

Being “promoted” to project manager

The Permanent Organisaon

The Project Cycle and the Stage Model as an Accelerang Source of Stress Project Management Turnover and Turnover Intenons

Fig. 1. The relationship between the temporary and permanent organisational forms. Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

6

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

could use them for the offer. Then it became a top priority to develop materials for the samples, while at the same time preparing production documentation and developing drawings and all that. Then the process was delayed. Then, when we conducted the prototype trials, we were spending a lot of time on the offer and preparing the documentation. This extra work is not normally required in projects.

R: Now, when all project resources went into emergency responses, were there any resources available for the daily work? PM: No, the project suffered. As project manager, I should've handled it differently. I should've made sure that I had the resources to work both with the project and do the daily work. A former project manager at The Big Electric Company took up a lower position (as a project team specialist) because he experienced work burnout as a consequence of this conflict between line and project management. If you had systems and structures for testing, you'd probably gain a lot, […] but I don't think that the organisation takes responsibility and highlights this. Now you take [a foreign company's] order, and now you're going to enter [a foreign country]. So we sat and made [production planning] for our major [development] projects. When the customers were here for several weeks, we discussed how you customise the product to meet this or that [requirement]. That was time we lost in the projects but we couldn't object. It had to be done. And then they asked us: ‘why are you late?’ (former Project Manager, current Team Specialist at The Big Electric Company) In our third example, a project manager at The Medtech Company explained the priorities when line management has a conflict with project management. Because line managers determine project workers' salaries and the allocation of project resources, they have the upper hand. The following comments make that point: I have a certain amount of time of… a resource, as we say. I have a certain percentage of a project member's available time. However, he also has a lot of other assignments given to him by a line supervisor. There's a conflict. Of course you have to listen to your manager. But there is frustration. […] and constant worry. It takes a lot of time. I have to postpone schedules and things like that just because we don't have the resources. We present our resource needs, but when the resources are not provided, I have to make plans to compensate for that. Then it's your fault when the project runs late. It's unrewarding. It leads to horse-trading with the line managers to get these resources. Not just a promise of resources, but really actually get them. (Project Manager 1,

The Medtech Company) A team leader at The Telecom Company thinks the line managers' responsibility is to allocate sufficient resources to projects: Most importantly, managers should say that either we have to reduce our scope or we must have more staff. They should be very clear and very firm about that. However, it becomes a problem when they know they're evaluated on the performance of certain tasks given a specific number of staff. This evaluation may cause managers to conceal their staff shortages. They may try to get along somehow and to make promises that they can't really keep. I get that feeling sometimes, and it makes me sad. (Team Leader, The Telecom Company) However, we found evidence that organisations sometimes resist the influence and power of line managers. For example, The Telecom Company tries to weaken the line organisation while at the same time empowering the projects. In a roundabout fashion, competence (the workers) is spread over several departments rather than assigning workers with a specific competence to particular managers with the same competence. The result is that some workers have a manager with a similar competence while other workers do not. Yes, in principle, we have a line structure where everyone who works with [tests] works at [the Department Test], but there's no correlation between the first line managers' responsibilities and their employees' responsibilities. This means that my boss has a few employees who work with test environments, a few employees who work with test automation, a couple of employees who work with follow ups on daily tests, and a few employees who work with other types of support activities. But my boss is still responsible for the test environment and test automation […]. So I think that in many ways we have a better situation than many of my co-workers. If I have a problem, I always know which manager to turn to. For others, it might be difficult to know: Should I go to my boss now or should I go to the manager who is responsible for my area? For example, if people are unhappy with me as a team leader, I don't know whom they should turn to. It's a problem for my department as well as a personal problem for them. (Team Leader, The Telecom Company) Another source of conflict is the scarcity of resources. Project managers rarely approach line managers to ask for more resources. A manager at The Telecom Company joked: ‘Well, they've given up asking because they never get any more resources’. Project managers are essentially on their own as far as resolving the problem of scarcity of resources.

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

It's a little bit of a lower priority when we negotiate between the projects. We say. ‘We're short in this series, is there anything we can do? Can you help us?’ Or we negotiate… […] Both [a project manager] and I sit in the same project office, so we normally first try to deal with the problem straight away. Then, if there's a decision that needs approval, we go back to the steering groups for both projects and confirm that everyone agrees with any significant deal we have made. We're always helping each other out in different ways. (Project Manager 2, The Telecom Company) In summary, the project manager experienced a lack of resources since the project workers assigned for project work needed to do line work assigned by their own line manager. This led to an almost constant frustration due to the lack of resources. It's worth noting here that this is a situation that is very much the opposite of the situation where the line provides resources (although sometimes perceived as too little too late) to the projects. Instead we have seen several instances where the projects act as a pool of resources for the line organisation. 2.2.3. Being ‘promoted’ to project manager Several interviewees discussed their lack of preparation for the project manager position. They said that technical experts are often promoted to the project manager position. Such promotions are often quite sudden, particularly when a project manager leaves at short notice. Most of the project managers said they lacked formal management training; they have to learn the skills “on the job”. Occasionally, they are assigned a mentor or are sent on a project administration course. Actually I was ready to quit last year. […] just because I couldn't do the work. It was my first management project, and I was not prepared for the pressure from above. Instead of making demands, I tried to fix the problem. As I dug deeper into the problem, I nearly drowned. Now, in the last six months, I'm beginning to get my head above water because I have now distanced myself from the problem. I have lost respect for my manager who isn't always right. You should put pressure on them, too; it shouldn't be a oneway street […] I think project managers need time to learn and build up their competence. New project managers must have independent mentors for support rather than just their own managers. [Tom], who was the manager for [Project A], from the beginning quit. It was his second project. [Anton] took over the project as his first project: he quit after one and a half years. […] [Project B] had a new project manager, my brother [Tommy]. He changed work after experience this. [Chris] was project manager for [Project C] and I had [Project D] so we were together from the beginning. Chris refused all project manager assignments after that project. [John], the project manager for [Project E], is a project manager for the first time here. [Martin] is a new project manager for [Project F]. It's his first project. It seems that so

7

many managers take a managerial position, and then refuse to repeat the experience. (Project Manager, The Big Electric Company). Another project manager described his atypical experience as a new project manager where he received help from a colleague on an informal basis only. There was help from my colleagues, but the person I was working closely with left. She helped me quite a lot for the first month or so as a coach. She was one of the main project managers and I could sit down with her for a few minutes every day and just re-check our priorities. That was very helpful. When you step into a new role, you need constant feedback about the things you need to focus on, the things that require some attention, the areas that will cause you problems later. I don't know whether this situation is common. I rather think not. It wasn't a matter of, for example, saying, ‘Okay, you're new in this role so you get a coach’. As I had to take over someone else's role quite quickly, she knew that there was another manager who could help me. The help that I value the most is coaching rather than […] sharing tasks. I would say that the help I got was just something special for this particular situation. (Project Manager 2, The Telecom Company) We perceive a lack of support for and also lack of understanding of the project manager's role and situation at an organisational level in both the negative and positive examples. Individuals may or may not appreciate the role of the project manager; nevertheless there is widespread opinion among our case companies that there are none or at least too few formal structures to handle training, coaching and mentoring. 2.2.4. The project cycle and the stage model as an accelerating source of stress As previously described, premature continuation decisions are sometimes made at gates. Difficulties, such as project delays and an increase in project worker stress, may ensue when these decisions are made. The following exchange between a researcher (R) and a project manager (PM) at The Telecom Company illustrates these problems: PM: In the planning phase of the project, you're generally not so busy. You have some time to gather information, reflect, draw up your plan, and check it with other people. But it certainly feels as if in recent years that amount of time has shrunk and shrunk. I think we're almost constantly falling behind. You're not able to plan as thoroughly as you'd like to. But I think that's the nature of our work. And the fact is that this is a business. You'll never get all the resources you want. R: Then you don't have enough time for personal development or to develop the work processes?

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

8

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

PM: You become short-sighted. That's definitely a danger. You don't have enough time to develop either yourself or your team. Another project manager described the intensive work in projects that requires prioritising among different projects and other line organisation work.

with procedures, priorities, and so on, in a way that keeps me from growing. And that's one reason why I'd like to do something else, at least something a little different quite soon. I might become a better team leader if I'm not a team leader for a while. Right now, in my role as team leader, I don't feel that I'm getting any better at being a team leader. (Team Leader, The Telecom Company.)

The work is often stressful, especially in [X projects] where we have fixed deadlines. At [the tollgates], there can be a lot to do in a short period of time. The situation is often very stressful. […] It's never a matter of someone having too little to do […] when you work on [X projects] you have to put other stuff aside, for example, competence projects, when there are important tasks you have to perform. That's what you do. End of story. And then maybe there'll be a quieter period later on when you can deal with the things you put aside. (Project Manager 1, The Steel Company)

Project managers who have managed several projects may find themselves pigeon-holed into a managerial position, with few (or no) career paths or opportunities for development compared with the permanent organisation. Here we note a general frustration over career development but predominately over misaligned responsibility and authority, lack of training, guidance and support.

The temporary organisation, with its gate decisions (properly made or not) and conflicts with the line organisation, tends to accelerate the levels of stress in the project management team. One important aspect of this seems to be the strict focus on tasks, both on behalf of the line organisation (as achievements) and the project team (as goals). At the same time, influence over strategic decisions does not lie in the hands of the project manager.

The aim with this paper has been to explore the status of temporary projects as a workplace for project managers in permanent organisations. Our point of departure was the literature describing projects as temporary organisation forms and project management motivation and stress. From the interviews we concluded five areas of importance when exploring the idea of a temporary project as a workplace. In the following Section we discuss the interview findings in relation to the literature. The projects studied were obliged to follow a formal strict gate model, initially developed in order to compensate for the lack of formal structures in temporary organisations (Hanisch and Wald, 2013), when, in actual fact important decisions were often discussed and made in the permanent line organisation itself in an informal manner. Good relationships played an important role in the coordination of the projects, acting as a substitute for permanent and formalised structures (cf. Nahapiet and Ghosal, 1998). The informal relationships helped project management to reduce the organisational complexity (see Hanisch and Wald, 2013; Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2001; Nahapiet and Ghosal, 1998), but at the same time they seemed to add further stress and frustration to the already high workload. Therefore, we argue that this need to act outside formal project management meetings in the permanent organisation itself, which according to one of the interviewees reduced the meetings to mere “project theatres”, is problematic. In addition, projects are driven by deadlines, and gate models are there to provide predictability in a challenging work activity (Maier and Branzei, 2014). But, when line management passes through a gate (during a project management meeting) despite the fact that the project in question is not actually ready for that, and without allocating more resources and subsequently holding project management accountable for the lack of progress made in the project, this predictability is lost — the gate model has become hypocrisy. We see this as a symptom of the malfunction of communication and interaction between the temporary and permanent parts of the organisation based on bureaucratic ideas. As already mentioned, earlier studies show that project workers often hold various hierarchical positions and have various tasks outside the temporary organisation that may lead

2.2.5. Project management turnover and turnover intentions The hypocrisy of the gate model, the accelerating source of stress and insufficient training leads to a high turnover of staff and high turnover intentions. There's currently quite a high turnover of project managers. Perhaps that's why so many have left the group. They leave the company, or leave the project management group, or take other company assignments. The project leaders get tired of this. It's a bad situation. […] For a long time now I've been working with a sub-project manager who dreams about resigning at night. (Project Manager 1, The Medtech Company) Furthermore, without a plan for educating and developing new project managers, companies have difficulty finding competent project managers. Thus, because of the shortage of new project managers, existing project managers find themselves on the spinning wheel of projects. I said I wanted another job after a maximum of six months in my current position. Then, after half a year, I was replaced as team leader and so got to work with other things for three months. Then I was made team leader for another team. It's hard to say no. I could've said, ‘No, I don't want to take the team leader job’. But my supervisor determines my salary. So, to make a good impression, I took the position. I want to do what others think I'm good at. If I work in areas that I'm bad at, then I don't think I deserve the compensation I'd earn in areas I'm good at. […] I could still develop but I am busy

3. Discussion

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

to conflicts (Baccarini, 1996; Jones and Deckro, 1993; Packendorff, 1995). This is also the case in our study. We have even observed the permanent line organisation pulling resources from the projects, and project management have learnt that there is no point in having a conflict with the line organisation instead they usually resolve the resource problem in collaboration with other project managers. The result is that there is always some kind of “debt” in the project portfolio — there will always be a lack of resources somewhere. Arguably, the permanent organisation and its cadre of permanent organisers still have a substantial strategic grip on power, influence and status. As argued by Clegg and Courpasson (2004): even if projects have become increasingly abundant, project work has yet to become a strategic occupation (Hodgson, 2002). We also perceive the lack of formal training for potential project managers as a result of strong permanent organisations in relation to weaker temporary organisations. We argue that permanent organisations need to take responsibility for providing structured guidance and support throughout the project management career of an individual as well as providing adequate training to prepare individual workers for the project management role. This would not only be beneficial to the project manager him/herself, but also to the organisation as a whole. A recent study by Lappe and Spang (2014) found that investments in project management, such as the training of project managers, had positive effects, both quantitative (e.g., cost and time savings) and qualitative (e.g., employee and customer satisfaction). The lack of both training as well as a strategic role in the temporary organisation, definitely ensures that a project manager's work and position are marginalised. Ferreira et al. (2012) argue that the specific features of temporary organisations, such as limited timespans, may have a substantial negative effect on how individuals cooperate and support each other. Our study also indicates that the limited timespans and deadlines (cf. Bakker, 2010), as well as in particular the gates to be passed on the way to the final deadline are a source of frustration and stress, largely because the line organisation makes decisions that are best for the line organisation, and not (not obvious anyway) for the project. Thus according to Hanisch and Wald (2013), the temporary organisations in our study are in the hands of the permanent organisation. There seem to be two reasons for turnover intensions that may stem from the conflict between permanent and temporary organisations described above. On the one hand there is the highly stressful environment, the general frustration over misaligned responsibility and authority, the lack of resources and training, guidance and support (cf. Pinto et al., 2014). On the other there is the fact that project managers who have managed several projects may find themselves pigeon-holed into that managerial position, with few (or no) career paths or opportunities for development compared with the permanent organisation (cf. Hölzle, 2010). As mentioned earlier, Hözle calls for clear career paths for project managers as well as a trend towards more inter-organisational career moves as opposed to traditional intra-organisational career moves by such managers. There is reason to believe that the two aspects of turnover intentions are often intertwined as projects in general are seen as

9

poor working environments for project managers. Thus, when changing the large number of turnover intentions among project managers, both career paths and the working environment need to be considered. In all, there is a need for new HRM policies to bridge the gap between temporary and permanent organisations.

3.1. New HRM policies to bridge the gap Ferreira et al. (2012) recommend that in order to be successful, project workers should study the specific features of temporary organisations. We complement this recommendation by suggesting an elaboration of Engwall's (2003) proposal that views projects less as “islands” and project managers as explorers rather than islanders. Thus, permanent organisations should recognise the tension between a temporary and a permanent organisation, and should create HRM policies that help resolve the conflicts between the two. Söderlund and Bredin (2006) point at four critical areas where improved HRM policies can be beneficial to a projectintensive organisation: knowledge development and integration, trust building, change initiation, and artist agency. In our multi-case research, our conclusion is that the problem of “non-strategic” project management is inherent in all four of these areas. Many companies, even those with a substantial and increasing projectification of strategic activities, still lag behind as regards organising and supporting their project managers. This deficiency is probably best explained by the concept of the “artist agency”, which is defined as follows: Identify individual needs, wants, and problems. Promote career development and balance between work and private life, balance between intense and low intense periods of work. Filter the performance anxiety and support the personal and professional development of the project worker (Söderlund and Bredin, 2006, p. 263). We argue that improving the situation of project managers requires more effort than merely increasing organisational support activities with regard to the work-life balance, career and skills development. Although such areas are significantly underdeveloped in many contemporary organisations, this underdevelopment is only one aspect of the problem. There is a more fundamental problem in the relationship between permanent and temporary organisations. We claim that many of our empirical observations are symptoms of a strong “industrial-modern” mind-set rather than of a “post-industrial post-modern” mind-set where a permanent organisation and its activities are still defined as the strategic apex (cf. Clegg and Courpasson, 2004; Pinto, 2000). The fact that project workers are used for line activities and projects are prematurely passed through gates underscores the reality of this situation. We admit that not all project managers are at a disadvantage because of their position in the temporary organisation. If a project makes a substantial contribution to overall company performance, project management may gain more recognition and influence than if their R&D work is not beneficial to some future (and uncertain) development.

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

10

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx

The development and implementation of improved systems that recognise the specific challenges of project organisation is a necessary step if the goal is more sustainable working conditions for project managers. This step certainly requires the careful operationalisation of practices (Söderlund and Bredin, 2006) and the development of career paths (Hölzle, 2010). However, there is a risk that such measures, if not properly controlled, may continue to support the dominance of permanent organisations over the adjacent less powerful temporary organisation. To avoid this outcome, it may be wiser to conceptualise projects as stepping stones – in and out – within the traditional hierarchical organisation. This would decrease the awkwardness of projects by adapting them more to the activities of the permanent organisation. 4. Conclusion Projects and project work present a paradox. Projects are used strategically in the R&D efforts of companies to promote innovation and growth. However, project managers often feel that they are not respected by the permanent organisations or that they have the same opportunities, even when their projects are highly successful. We propose, based on our empirical research, that one reason why project work is not sustainable is the imbalance of power that exists between the permanent and the temporary organisational forms (cf. Engwall, 2003). Despite much talk about post-industrial organisation principles, we find that projects are still very much islands in the four industrial organisations that we studied. They are still guided by traditional industrial cultures and values where line work is and remains the strategic core process of the organisation. Our research leads to the question whether there is actually a need for rather unorthodox action — a cultural revolution in organisational structures. Thus, we invite the reader to contemplate a deliberate deprojectification of organisations. Without denying the need for project work, we argue that there is cause to reduce the separation between project workers and non-project workers. Therefore, unlike for instance Hölzle (2010), we encourage (both in practice and in research) more integrated career paths where project work is only sometimes a necessity and is also a reward for successful progress made in a permanent organisation. Conflict of interest None. Acknowledgement The first author's research is funded by VINNOVA — Sweden's innovation agency. References Ambrose, M.L., Kulik, C.T., 1999. Old friends, new faces: motivation research in the 1990s. J. Manag. 25 (3), 231–292.

Artto, K., Kulvik, I., Poskela, J., Turkulainen, V., 2011. The integrative role of the project management office in the front end of innovation. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 29, 408–421. Baccarini, D., 1996. The concept of project complexity — a review. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 14, 201–204. Bakker, R.M., 2010. Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: a systematic review and research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 12, 466–486. Bechky, B.A., 2006. Gaffers, gofers and grips: role-based coordination in temporary organisations. Organ. Sci. 17, 3–21. Bredin, K., Söderlund, J., 2013. Project managers and career models: an exploratory comparative study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31 (6), 889–902. Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., Frederiksen, L. Täube F., 2011. Project-based organizing and strategic management: a long-term research agenda on temporary organizational forms. In: Cattani, G., Ferriani, S., Frederiksen, L., Täube, F. (Eds.), Project-based Organizing and Strategic Management. Emerald, Bingley, UK, pp. xv–xxxix. Cicmil, S., Hodgson, D., Lindgren, M., Packendorff, P., 2009. Project management behind the façade. Ephemera 9, 78–92. Clegg, S., Courpasson, D., 2004. Political hybrids: Tocquevillean views on project organizations. J. Manag. Stud. 41 (4), 525–547. Dellve, L., Stjernberg, T., 2008. Projekt som källa till både engagemang och stress [Projects as sources of both commitment and stress]. In: Stjernberg, T., Söderlund, J., Wikström, E. (Eds.), Projektliv: Villkor för uthållig projektverksamhet [Project life: Conditions for Sustainable Project Activities]. Lund, Studentlitteratur, pp. 33–58. Demers, F., 2001. Holding on to your best people. Res. Technol. Manag. 40 (1), 13–16. Dwivedula, R., Bredillet, C.N., 2010. Profiling work motivation of project workers. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 28 (2), 158–165. Ekstedt, E., Lundin, R.A., Söderholm, A., Wirdenius, H., 1999. Neo-Industrial Organizing: Renewal by Action and Knowledge Formation in a ProjectIntensive Economy. Routledge, London. El-Sabaa, S., 2001. The skills and career path of an effective project manager. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 19, 1–7. Engwall, M., 2003. No project is an island: linking projects to history and context. Res. Policy 32, 789–808. Ferreira, A.I., Braun, T., Sydow, J., 2012. Citizenship behaviour and effectiveness in temporary organizations. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31, 862–876. Friis Sommer, A., Dukovska-Popovska, I., Steger-Jensen, K., 2014. Barriers towards integrated product development — challenges from a holistic project management perspective. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 970–982. Gällstedt, M., 2003. Working conditions in projects: perceptions of stress and motivation among project team members and project managers. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 21 (6), 449–455. Gann, D.M., Salter, A.J., 2000. Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems. Res. Policy 29 (7–8), 955–972. Hall, D., 2007. The relationship between supervisor support and registered nurse outcomes in nursing care units. Nurs. Adm. Q. 31 (1), 68–80. Hanisch, B., Wald, A., 2013. Effects of Complexity on the Success of Temporary Organizations: Relationship Quality and Transparency as Substitute for Formal Coordination Mechanisms. Scandinavian Journal of Management. Hobday, M., 2000. The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Res. Policy 29, 871–893. Hodgson, D., 2002. Disciplining the professional: the case of project management. J. Manag. Stud. 39 (6), 803–820. Hodgson, D.E., 2004. Project work: the legacy of bureaucratic control in the post-bureaucratic organization. Organization 11, 81–100. Hoegl, M., Gemuenden, H.G., 2001. Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organ. Sci. 12, 435–449. Hölzle, K., 2010. Designing and implementing a career path for project managers. J. Proj. Manag. 28 (8), 779–786. Huemann, M., Keegan, A.E., Turner, J.R., 2007. Human resource management in the project-oriented company: a review. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25, 315–323. Janowicz-Panjaitan, M., Bakker, R.M., Kenis, P., 2009. Research on temporary organizations: the state of the art and distinct approaches toward temporariness. In: Kenis, D.P., Janowicz-Panjaitan, M., Cambré, B. (Eds.), Temporary

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002

K. Palm, M. Lindahl / International Journal of Project Management xx (2014) xxx–xxx Organizations: Prevalence, Logic and Effectiveness. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp. 56–85. Jensen, J.M., Patel, P.C., Messersmith, J.G., 2013. High-performance work systems and job control: consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. J. Manag. 39 (6), 1699–1724. Jones, R.E., Deckro, R.F., 1993. The social psychology of project management conflict. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 64, 216–228. Lappe, M., Spang, K., 2014. Investments in project management are profitable: a case study-based analysis of the relationship between the costs and benefits of project management. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 603–612. Larsen, H.H., 2002. Oticon: unorthodox project-based management and careers in a spaghetti organization. Hum. Resour. Plan. 25 (4), 30–37. Legard, R., Keegan, J., Ward, K., 2003. In-depth interviews. In: Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Sage Publications, London, pp. 136–169. Lindgren, M., Packendorff, J., 2008. Från projektarbete till projektintensivt arbete: Människan och projektarbetets institutionalisering. [From project work to project-intensive work: Human and project work institutionalisation]. In: Stjernberg, T., Söderlund, J., Wikström, E. (Eds.), Projektliv: Villkor för uthållig projektverksamhet: [Project life: Conditions for Sustainable Project Activities]. Lund, Studentlitteratu, pp. 33–58. Lundin, R.A., Hartman, F. (Eds.), 2000. Projects as Business Constituents and Guiding Motives. Kluwer Academic Press, Boston. Lundin, R., Söderholm, A., 1995. A theory of the temporary organization. Scand. J. Manag. 11, 437–455. Maaninen-Olsson, E., Müllern, T., 2009. A contextual understanding of projects: the importance of space and time. Scand. J. Manag. 25, 327–339. Maier, E.R., Branzei, O., 2014. “On time and on budget”: harnessing creativity in large scale projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32 (7), 1123–1133. Maylor, H., 2001. Beyond the Gantt chart: project management moving on. Eur. Manag. J. 19, 92–100. Maylor, H., 2010. Project Management, 4th edition. Prentice Hall, London. Miller, J., Glassner, B., 2011. The ‘inside’ and the ‘outside’: finding realities in interviews, In: Silverman, D. (Ed.), Qualitative Research, 3rd edition Sage, pp. 131–148.

11

Nahapiet, J., Ghosal, S., 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23, 242–266. Packendorff, J., 1995. Inquiring into the temporary organization: new directions for project management research. Scand. J. Manag. 11, 319–333. Parker, S.K., Skitmore, M., 2005. Project management turnover: causes and effects on project performance. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 23 (3), 205–214. Pauget, B., Wald, A., 2013. Relational competence in complex contemporary organizations: the case of a French hospital construction project network. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 31, 200–211. Pinto, J.K., 2000. Understanding the role of politics in successful project management. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 18 (2), 85–91. Pinto, J.K., Dawood, S., Pinto, M.B., 2014. Project management and burnout: implications of the demand–control–support model on project based work. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 578–589. Schmid, B., Adams, J., 2008. Motivation in project management: the project manager's perspective. Proj. Manag. J. 39 (2), 60–71. Seiler, S., Lent, B., Pinkowska, M., Pinazza, M., 2012. An integrated model of factors influencing project managers' motivation — findings from a Swiss survey. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 30, 60–72. Skakon, J., Nielsen, K., Borg, V., Guzman, J., 2010. Are leaders' well-being, behaviors and style associated with the affective well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three decades of research. Work Stress. 24 (2), 107–139. Söderlund, J., Bredin, K., 2006. HRM in project-intensive firms: changes and challenges. Hum. Resour. Manag. 45 (2), 249–265. Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K.P., Futrell, D., 1990. Work teams: applications and effectiveness. Am. Psychol. 45, 120–133. Sveiby, K.E., 1997. The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-based Assets. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco. Yin, R.K., 2003. Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks.

Please cite this article as: K. Palm, M. Lindahl, 2014. A project as a workplace, Int. J. Proj. Manag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.002