IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v41y2024i1p3-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Project management and system dynamics modelling: Time to connect with innovation and sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Javier Andres Calderon‐Tellez
  • Gary Bell
  • Milton M. Herrera
  • Carlos Sato

Abstract

This paper argues that there is a requirement to connect project management (PM) with innovation and sustainability to address new societal needs. Societal demands have facilitated further complexity and uncertainty within the PM discipline and have led to both theoretical and practical evolutions. Key evolutions are identified, which suggests that PM is becoming more holistic and interdisciplinary in nature so it can successfully deal with this complexity and uncertainty. Furthermore, holistic thinking naturally connects with systemic thinking, which justifies the selection of system dynamics (SD) to support PM decision‐making. An extensive critical review of SD modelling with respect to identified evolutions within the PM discipline is undertaken. The contribution of this paper connects innovation and sustainability to the PM discipline by the initial development of a causal loop diagram (CLD).

Suggested Citation

  • Javier Andres Calderon‐Tellez & Gary Bell & Milton M. Herrera & Carlos Sato, 2024. "Project management and system dynamics modelling: Time to connect with innovation and sustainability," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 3-29, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:41:y:2024:i:1:p:3-29
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2926
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2926
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2926?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    2. M. M. Kessler, 1963. "Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers," American Documentation, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 10-25, January.
    3. Min-Ren Yan & Nhan Tran-Danh & Lin-Ya Hong, 2019. "Knowledge-based decision support system for improving e-business innovations and dynamic capability of IT project management," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 125-136, April.
    4. Jakomijn van Wijk & Charlene Zietsma & Silvia Dorado & Frank de Bakker & Ignasi Marti, 2018. "Social Innovation: Integrating Micro, Meso, and Macro Level Insights From Institutional Theory," Post-Print hal-02570915, HAL.
    5. Ye, Gui & Yuan, Hongping & Shen, Liyin & Wang, Hongxia, 2012. "Simulating effects of management measures on the improvement of the environmental performance of construction waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 56-63.
    6. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    7. Shankar Sankaran & Mattias Jacobsson & Tomas Blomquist, 2021. "The history and future of projects as a transition innovation: Towards a sustainable project management framework," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 696-714, October.
    8. Christopher Foster & Richard Heeks, 2013. "Conceptualising Inclusive Innovation: Modifying Systems of Innovation Frameworks to Understand Diffusion of New Technology to Low-Income Consumers," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 25(3), pages 333-355, July.
    9. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden & Terry Williams, 1997. "Modeling for Litigation: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 48-65, April.
    10. C Eden & T Williams & F Ackermann & S Howick, 2000. "The role of feedback dynamics in disruption and delay on the nature of disruption and delay (D&D) in major projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(3), pages 291-300, March.
    11. Sylvain Lenfle & Christoph Loch, 2010. "Lost Roots: How Project Management Came to Emphasize Control Over Flexibility and Novelty," Post-Print hal-00557549, HAL.
    12. Anne-Wil Harzing, 2014. "A longitudinal study of Google Scholar coverage between 2012 and 2013," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 565-575, January.
    13. Rajaa Alasad & Ibrahim Motawa, 2015. "Dynamic demand risk assessment for toll road projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(10), pages 799-817, October.
    14. Maria Kapsali, 2013. "Equifinality in Project Management Exploring Causal Complexity in Projects," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 2-14, January.
    15. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    16. Frank Fogarty & Amy Villamagna & Allen Whitley & Kelly Pippins, 2013. "The Capacity to Endure: Following Nature’s Lead," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Howick, Susan, 2005. "Using system dynamics models with litigation audiences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 239-250, April.
    18. Mark Winter, 2009. "Using Soft Systems Methodology to Structure Project Definition," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Terry M. Williams & Knut Samset & Kjell J. Sunnevåg (ed.), Making Essential Choices with Scant Information, chapter 7, pages 125-144, Palgrave Macmillan.
    19. Kenneth G. Cooper, 1980. "Naval Ship Production: A Claim Settled and a Framework Built," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 20-36, December.
    20. Zhikun Ding & Wenyan Gong & Shenghan Li & Zezhou Wu, 2018. "System Dynamics versus Agent-Based Modeling: A Review of Complexity Simulation in Construction Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, July.
    21. A G Rodrigues & T M Williams, 1997. "System dynamics in software project management: towards the development of a formal integrated framework," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 51-66, March.
    22. Cátia Barbosa & Américo Azevedo, 2018. "Hybrid modelling of MTO/ETO manufacturing environments for performance assessment," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(15), pages 5147-5171, August.
    23. Gimenez, Cristina & Sierra, Vicenta & Rodon, Juan, 2012. "Sustainable operations: Their impact on the triple bottom line," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 149-159.
    24. Pierre-Benoît Joly, 2017. "Beyond the Competitiveness Framework? Models of Innovation Revisited," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 79-96.
    25. Farnad Nasirzadeh & Abbas Afshar & Mostafa Khanzadi & Susan Howick, 2008. "Integrating system dynamics and fuzzy logic modelling for construction risk management," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(11), pages 1197-1212.
    26. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    27. Federico Cosenz & Lidia Noto, 2015. "Combining system dynamics modelling and management control systems to support strategic learning processes in SMEs: a Dynamic Performance Management approach," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 225-248, August.
    28. Galbraith, Jay R., 1971. "Matrix organization designs How to combine functional and project forms," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 29-40, February.
    29. A N Mashayekhi, 2000. "Project cost dynamics for development policy-making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(3), pages 301-310, March.
    30. S Howick, 2003. "Using system dynamics to analyse disruption and delay in complex projects for litigation: can the modelling purposes be met?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 222-229, March.
    31. T M Williams, 1999. "Seeking optimum project duration extensions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(5), pages 460-467, May.
    32. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.
    33. Min-Ren Yan, 2015. "Project-Based Market Competition and Policy Implications for Sustainable Developments in Building and Construction Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-26, November.
    34. Robert E. Lucas, Jr., 1971. "Optimal Management of a Research and Development Project," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(11), pages 679-697, July.
    35. Qingbin Cui & Makarand Hastak & Daniel Halpin, 2010. "Systems analysis of project cash flow management strategies," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 361-376.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    2. T Williams, 2003. "Learning from projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(5), pages 443-451, May.
    3. S Howick & C Eden, 2004. "On the nature of discontinuities in system dynamics modelling of disrupted projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(6), pages 598-605, June.
    4. Howick, Susan & Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran & Williams, Terry, 2008. "Building confidence in models for multiple audiences: The modelling cascade," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(3), pages 1068-1083, May.
    5. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    6. Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & López-Cabarcos, M. Ángeles & Romero-Castro, Noelia María & Pérez-Pico, Ada María, 2020. "Innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge in the business scientific field: Mapping the research front," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 475-485.
    7. Akinpelu, O.A. & Olaleye, O. & Fagbola, O., 2023. "The Soil Organic Matter Decomposers: A Bibliometric Analysis," International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research, Malwa International Journals Publication, vol. 9(4), August.
    8. Pruthiranjan Dwibedi & Debasis Pahi & Antarjyami Sahu, 2024. "Mapping the landscape of environmental, social and governance research: A bibliometric analysis," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 3745-3767, September.
    9. Merlone, Ugo & Lupano, Matteo, 2022. "Third party funding: The minimum claim value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(2), pages 738-747.
    10. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Nasrabadi, Mohamadreza Azar & Beauregard, Yvan & Ekhlassi, Amir, 2024. "The implication of user-generated content in new product development process: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    12. Ignacio Rodríguez-Rodríguez & José-Víctor Rodríguez & Niloofar Shirvanizadeh & Andrés Ortiz & Domingo-Javier Pardo-Quiles, 2021. "Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Big Data and the Internet of Things to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scientometric Review Using Text Mining," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-29, August.
    13. F Ackermann & C Eden & T Williams & S Howick, 2007. "Systemic risk assessment: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(1), pages 39-51, January.
    14. Ooms, Tahnee & Klaser, Klaudijo & Ishkanian, Armine, 2023. "The role of academia practice partnerships in the well-being economy: Retracing synergies between health and social sciences using bibliometric analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Raymundo das Neves Machado & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Jacqueline Leta, 2016. "Intellectual structure in stem cell research: exploring Brazilian scientific articles from 2001 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 525-537, February.
    16. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    17. Ali Najmi & Taha H. Rashidi & Alireza Abbasi & S. Travis Waller, 2017. "Reviewing the transport domain: an evolutionary bibliometrics and network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 843-865, February.
    18. Kumar, Satish & Chavan, Meena & Pandey, Nitesh, 2023. "Journal of International Management: A 25-year review using bibliometric analysis," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(1).
    19. Jun-Ping Qiu & Ke Dong & Hou-Qiang Yu, 2014. "Comparative study on structure and correlation among author co-occurrence networks in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1345-1360, November.
    20. Edwards-Schachter,Mónica & Wallace,Matthew, 2015. "âShaken, but not stirredâ: six decades defining social innovation," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201504, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:41:y:2024:i:1:p:3-29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.