IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/bushst/v65y2023i1p131-156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing private and public approaches to state megaproject implementation: The R100-R101 airship development case study

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Jill Bamforth
  • Malcolm Abbott

Abstract

State support is critical to enhancing a country’s capacity for innovation and for delivering large-scale complex projects where significant upfront investment is required. These megaprojects are high risk due to their size, investment level, time duration and the type of innovation required. Their complexity means that context affects decision-making, innovation approach taken and project implementation. We utilise the 1921 Great Britain Imperial Airship Scheme to examine the impact of environment on the delivery by a State/government firm and a Private firm of a megaproject bound by common technical specifications. Edquist’s System of Innovation (2006) was used to examine the context; Flyvbjerg’s four sublimes (2012, 2014) to examine shifting stakeholder motivations, and Morris and Geraldi (2011) project management levels to critically examine how the megaproject unfolded. We argue the value of using select contemporary theory to deepen understanding of past historical megaproject implementation and perceptions of success.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Jill Bamforth & Malcolm Abbott, 2023. "Comparing private and public approaches to state megaproject implementation: The R100-R101 airship development case study," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 65(1), pages 131-156, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:bushst:v:65:y:2023:i:1:p:131-156
    DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2020.1806823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00076791.2020.1806823
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00076791.2020.1806823?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:bushst:v:65:y:2023:i:1:p:131-156. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/FBSH20 .

    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.