IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v47y2001i3p394-414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains

Author

Listed:
  • Aaron J. Shenhar

    (Wesley J. Howe School of Technology Management, Stevens Institute of Technology, Castle Point on the Hudson, Hoboken, New Jersey 07030)

Abstract

Not many authors have attempted to classify projects according to any specific scheme, and those who have tried rarely offered extensive empirical evidence. From a theoretical perspective, a traditional distinction between radical and incremental innovation has often been used in the literature of innovation, and has created the basis for many classical contingency studies. Similar concepts, however, did not become standard in the literature of projects, and it seems that theory development in project management is still in its early years. As a result, most project management literature still assumes that all projects are fundamentally similar and that "one size fits all." The purpose of this exploratory research is to show how different types of projects are managed in different ways, and to explore the domain of traditional contingency theory in the more modern world of projects. This two-step research is using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods and two data sets to suggest a conceptual, two-dimensional construct model for the classification of technical projects and for the investigation of project contingencies. Within this framework, projects are classified into four levels of technological uncertainty, and into three levels of system complexity, according to a hierarchy of systems and subsystems. The study provides two types of implications. For project leadership it shows why and how management should adapt a more project-specific style. For theory development, it offers a collection of insights that seem relevant to the world of projects as temporary organizations, but are, at times, different from classical structural contingency theory paradigms in enduring organizations. While still exploratory in nature, this study attempts to suggest new inroads to the future study of modern project domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Aaron J. Shenhar, 2001. "One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 394-414, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:3:p:394-414
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.47.3.394.9772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.3.394.9772
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.47.3.394.9772?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. Dvir, D. & Lipovetsky, S. & Shenhar, A. & Tishler, A., 1998. "In search of project classification: a non-universal approach to project success factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 915-935, December.
    2. Kenneth E. Boulding, 1956. "General Systems Theory--The Skeleton of Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 197-208, April.
    3. L. J. Bourgeois, III & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1988. "Strategic Decision Processes in High Velocity Environments: Four Cases in the Microcomputer Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(7), pages 816-835, July.
    4. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    5. Richard L. Daft & Robert H. Lengel, 1986. "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 554-571, May.
    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. van Riel, A.C.R. & Lievens, A., 2003. "New service development in high tech sectors: a decision making perspective," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Argouslidis, Paraskevas C. & Baltas, George & Mavrommatis, Alexis, 2015. "An empirical investigation into the determinants of decision speed in product elimination decision processes," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 268-286.
    3. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    4. Eric (Er) Fang, 2011. "The Effect of Strategic Alliance Knowledge Complementarity on New Product Innovativeness in China," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 158-172, February.
    5. Liu, Zhiqiang & Huang, Yanyi & Huang, Ying & Song, Yiping Amy & Kumar, Ajay, 2022. "How does one-sided versus two-sided customer orientation affect B2B platform’s innovation: Differential effects with top management team status," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 619-632.
    6. Winkler, Jens & Kuklinski, Christian Paul Jian-Wei & Moser, Roger, 2015. "Decision making in emerging markets: The Delphi approach's contribution to coping with uncertainty and equivocality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1118-1126.
    7. Scott A. Shane & Karl T. Ulrich, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 133-144, February.
    8. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    9. Yen Tran & Volker Mahnke & Björn Ambos, 2010. "The Effect of Quantity, Quality and Timing of Headquarters-initiated Knowledge Flows on Subsidiary Performance," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 493-511, August.
    10. Schwieren, C.A.A., 2003. "The gender wage gap - due to differences in efficiency wage effects or discrimination?," Research Memorandum 028, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    11. John W. Boudreau, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Organizational Behavior, Strategy, Performance, and Design in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1463-1476, November.
    12. Viju Raghupathi & Raquel Benbunan-Fich, 2020. "A Social Capital Perspective on Computer-Mediated Group Communication and Performance: An Empirical Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 747-801, August.
    13. Amason, Allen C. & Shrader, Rodney C. & Tompson, George H., 2006. "Newness and novelty: Relating top management team composition to new venture performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 125-148, January.
    14. Ensley, Michael D. & Pearson, Allison W. & Amason, Allen C., 2002. "Understanding the dynamics of new venture top management teams: cohesion, conflict, and new venture performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 365-386, July.
    15. Hanisch, Bastian & Wald, Andreas, 2014. "Effects of complexity on the success of temporary organizations: Relationship quality and transparency as substitutes for formal coordination mechanisms," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 197-213.
    16. Joe Tidd & Frank Hull, 2002. "Organizing for Service Innovation: Best-Practice or Configurations?," SPRU Working Paper Series 77, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. Shenhar, Aaron J. & Dvir, Dov, 1996. "Toward a typological theory of project management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 607-632, June.
    18. Robert G. Fichman, 2004. "Real Options and IT Platform Adoption: Implications for Theory and Practice," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 132-154, June.
    19. Cécile Godé & Pierre Barbaroux, 2009. "Gérer dans la complexité: quels rôles pour les technologies de collaboration?," Post-Print hal-00386399, HAL.
    20. Bettis-Outland, Harriette, 2012. "Decision-making's impact on organizational learning and information overload," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 814-820.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:3:p:394-414. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.