IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/2018-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Limitations of the Conceptual Framework of the Heterogeneous Engineer for Leadership in Megascience Projects

Author

Listed:
  • David Eggleton

    (SPRU, University of Sussex, UK)

Abstract

The concept of the ‘heterogeneous engineer’, devised by Krige (2001) offers the intriguing possibility of applying a concept devised in the history of science literature to the academic study of leadership. This study sought to use the heterogeneous engineer as a conceptual framework to develop wider leadership theory. Two case studies were selected – the Tevatron at Fermilab in the United States and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN on the Franco-Swiss border. The LHC was of particular interest because Carlo Rubbia, identified by Krige (2001) as a classic heterogeneous engineer, played a leading role in its conception. However, the results of this study indicate that Carlo Rubbia is a relative anomaly within the context of scientific leadership and therefore the heterogeneous engineer is an inappropriate construct for the development of wider leadership theory. The paper also identifies and describes the generalised characteristics of leaders in megascience projects as a starting point for future work in this field.

Suggested Citation

  • David Eggleton, 2018. "The Limitations of the Conceptual Framework of the Heterogeneous Engineer for Leadership in Megascience Projects," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2018-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=2018-15-swps-eggleton.pdf&site=25
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geyer, Anton & Davies, Andrew, 2000. "Managing project-system interfaces: case studies of railway projects in restructured UK and German markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 991-1013, August.
    2. Irvine, John & Martin, Ben R., 1984. "CERN: Past performance and future prospects : II. The scientific performance of the CERN accelerators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 247-284, October.
    3. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461, September.
    4. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014. "What You Should Know About Megaprojects, and Why: An Overview," Papers 1409.0003, arXiv.org.
    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. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    2. Muhammad Zeeshan Fareed & Qin Su, 2022. "Project Governance and Project Performance: The Moderating Role of Top Management Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, February.
    3. Anthony E. Boardman & Matti Siemiatycki & Aidan R. Vining, 2016. "The Theory and Evidence Concerning Public-Private Partnerships in Canada and Elsewhere," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(12), March.
    4. Rothengatter, Werner, 2019. "Megaprojects in transportation networks," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-15.
    5. Rebecca Vine, 2020. "Riskwork in the construction of Heathrow Terminal 2," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Lehtonen, Markku, 2019. "Ecological Economics and Opening up of Megaproject Appraisal: Lessons From Megaproject Scholarship and Topics for a Research Programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 148-156.
    7. Dodgson, Mark & Gann, David & MacAulay, Sam & Davies, Andrew, 2015. "Innovation strategy in new transportation systems: The case of Crossrail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 261-275.
    8. Andrius Montrimas & Jurgita Bruneckienė & Vaidas Gaidelys, 2021. "Beyond the Socio-Economic Impact of Transport Megaprojects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-29, July.
    9. Leslie Paul Thiele, 2020. "Integrating political and technological uncertainty into robust climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 521-538, November.
    10. David Eggleton, 2020. "Tailoring Leadership to the Phase-Specific Needs of Large Scale Research Infrastructures," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Gil, Nuno, 2007. "On the value of project safeguards: Embedding real options in complex products and systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 980-999, September.
    12. Moschouli, Eleni & Soecipto, Raden Murwantara & Vanelslander, Thierry, 2019. "Cost performance of transport infrastructure projects before and after the global financial crisis (GFC): Are differences observed in the conditions of project performance?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 21-35.
    13. Florio, Massimo & Sirtori, Emanuela, 2016. "Social benefits and costs of large scale research infrastructures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 65-78.
    14. Köberle, Alexandre C. & Garaffa, Rafael & Cunha, Bruno S.L. & Rochedo, Pedro & Lucena, André F.P. & Szklo, Alexandre & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2018. "Are conventional energy megaprojects competitive? Suboptimal decisions related to cost overruns in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 689-700.
    15. Shankar Sankaran & Ralf Müller & Nathalie Drouin, 2020. "Creating a ‘sustainability sublime’ to enable megaprojects to meet the United Nations sustainable development goals," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 813-826, September.
    16. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2021. "Four Ways to Scale Up: Smart, Dumb, Forced, and Fumbled," Papers 2101.11104, arXiv.org.
    17. Marc Herz & Nicco Krezdorn, 2022. "Epic fail: Exploring project failure’s reasons, outcomes and indicators," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1169-1193, May.
    18. Gregory, Julian, 2020. "Governance, scale, scope: A review of six South African electricity generation infrastructure megaprojects," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    19. Massimo FLORIO & Emanuela SIRTORI, 2014. "The Evaluation of Research Infrastructures: a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework," Departmental Working Papers 2014-10, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    20. Atif Ansar & Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier & Daniel Lunn, 2016. "Big is Fragile: An Attempt at Theorizing Scale," Papers 1603.01416, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2017.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Megaprojects; big science; leadership; project management; research infrastructure;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:sru:ssewps:2018-15. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.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.