Structure of This Work
2. Literature Review
2.1. Project Management
2.2. Risk Management
2.3. Corporate Behavior
2.4. Social Network Analysis
3. Model Development and Implementation
3.1. Development to the Proposed Model
3.2. Implementation of the Proposed Model
4. Case Study
4.1. Introduction to the Case Study
4.2. Application of the Proposed Model and Interpretation of Results
5. Conclusions, Implications, and Further Developments
5.1. Proposed Model in This Work and Literature Research Implications
5.2. Proposed Model in This Work and Managerial Implications
5.3. Proposed Model in This Work and Ethical and Legal Considerations
5.4. Suggestions for Future Research
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Seymour, T.; Hussein, S. The history of project management. Int. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2014, 18, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwak, Y.H. Brief history of project management. In The Story of Managing Projects; Carayannis, K.A., Ed.; Quorum Books: Westport, CT, USA, 2003; Chapter 2. [Google Scholar]
- Snyder, J.R. Modern project management: How did we get here—Where do we go? Proj. Manag. J. 1987, 18, 28–29. [Google Scholar]
- PMI.PMI® (Project Management Institute). Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 6th ed.; Project Management Institute: Newtown Square, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Hillson, D.D. The Risk Doctor—Speaker at Risk Zone 2012. Stamford Global. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d3y863itjk (accessed on 1 January 2018).
- Nunes, M.; Abreu, A.; Saraiva, C. A Model to Manage Cooperative Project Risks to Create Knowledge and Drive Sustainable Business. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Standish Group International, Inc. CHAOS REPORT 2015. Available online: https://www.standishgroup.com/sample_research_files/CHAOSReport2015-Final.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2017).
- The Standish Group International, Inc. Project Resolution Benchmark Report—Jennifer Lynch—2018. Available online: https://www.standishgroup.com/sample_research_files/DemoPRBR.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2018).
- Project Performance Metrics. Reprinted from PMI’s Pulse of the Profession 9th Global Project Management Survey, by Project Management Institute. 2017. Available online: https://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pulse/pulse-of-the-profession-2017.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2018).
- Nunes, M.; Abreu, A. Applying social network analysis to identify project critical success factors. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillson, D.; Murray-Webster, R. Understanding and Managing Risk Attitude; Gower Publishing Ltd.: Aldershot, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Abreu, A.; Martins Moleiro, J.D.; Calado, J.M.F. Fuzzy Logic Model to Support Risk Assessment in Innovation Ecosystems, 2018. In Proceedings of the 13th APCA International Conference on Automatic Control and Soft Computing (CONTROLO), Ponta Delgada, Portugal, 4–6 June 2018; pp. 104–109. [Google Scholar]
- Workday Studios. Good Company—Michael Arena, Chris Ernst, Greg Pryor: Organizational Networks. 2018. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6faV0v0yVFU (accessed on 12 January 2021).
- Nunes, M.; Abreu, A. Managing open innovation project risks based on a social network analysis perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arena, M. Adaptive Space: How GM and Other Companies are Positively Disrupting Themselves and Transforming into Agile Organizations; McGraw Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Björkman, I.; Kock, S. Social relationships and business networks: The case of Western companies in China. Int. Bus. Rev. 1995, 4, 519–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontinen, T.; Ojala, A. Network ties in the international opportunity recognition of family SMEs. Int. Bus. Rev. 2011, 20, 440–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cross, R.; Rebele, R.; Grant, A. Collaborative Overload. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2016, 94, 74–79. [Google Scholar]
- Nunes, M.; Dias, A.; Abreu, A.; Martins, J.D.M. A predictive risk model based on social network analysis. In Proceedings of the 34th European Simulation and Modelling Conference, Toulouse, France, 21–23 October 2020; pp. 82–86. [Google Scholar]
- Durland, M.; Fredericks, K. An introduction to social network analysis. New Dir. Eval. 2006, 2005, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otte, E.; Rousseau, R. Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. J. Inf. Sci. 2002, 28, 441–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunes, M.; Abreu, A. A Model to support OI collaborative risks applying social network analysis. In Boosting Collaborative Networks 4.0. PRO-VE 2020. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Ortiz, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 598. [Google Scholar]
- Shehab, E. The True Cause of Project Failures, 2016—MCI Group—USA. Project Smart UK. 2018. Available online: https://articlebiz.com/article/1051638112-the-true-cause-of-project-failures (accessed on 12 March 2021).
- ISO–The International Organization for Standardization. Available online: https://www.iso.org/home.html (accessed on 1 September 2020).
- Hamdu, M.; Knapkova, A. The impact of total risk management on company’s performance. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 220, 271–277. [Google Scholar]
- Davies, D. Risk management: Holistic risk management. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 1997, 13, 336–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillson, D. How to manage the risks you didn’t know you were taking. In Proceedings of the PMI® Global Congress 2014—North America, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 26–28 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Seed, P.; Lloyd, G. Quality of Life; Jessica Kingsley Publishers: London, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Borgatti, S.P.; Everett, M.; Johnson, J. Analyzing Social Networks, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Kacanski, S.; Lusher, D. The Application of Social Network Analysis to Accounting and Auditing. Int. J. Acad. Res. Account. Financ. Mang. Sci. 2017, 7, 182–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clifton, A.; Webster, G. An Introduction to Social Network Analysis for Personality and Social Psychologists. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 2017, 8, 442–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maghraoui, A.; Richman, B.; Siegel, D.; Zanalda, G. Networks of Cooperation and Conflict in the Middle East (2017–2018). 2019. Available online: https://bassconnections.duke.edu/project-teams/networks-cooperation-and-conflict-middle-east-2017-2018 (accessed on 4 January 2020).
- Jarman, D.; Eleni, T.; Hazel, H.; Ali-Knight, J. Social network analysis and festival cities: An exploration of concepts, literature, and methods. Int. J. Event Festiv. Manag. 2014, 5, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ward, M.; Stovel, K.; Sacks, A. Network analysis and political science. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 2011, 14, 245–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, J.C. Social Network Analysis for Organizations, 4th ed.; Tichy, N.M., Tushman, M.L., Fombrun, C., Eds.; Academy of Management Review: Briarcliff Manor, NY, USA, 1979; pp. 507–519. [Google Scholar]
- Meyer, M.; Roodt, G.; Robbins, M. Human resources risk management: Governing people risks for improved performance. SA J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2011, 9, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruan, X.; Ochieng, P.; Price, A. The Evaluation of Social Network Analysis Application’s in the UK Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, Bristol, UK, 5–7 September 2011; Association of Researchers in Construction Management ARCOM: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Carlsson, L.; Sandström, A. Network governance of the commons. Int. J. Commons 2008, 2, 33–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newig, J.; Günther, D.; Pahl-Wostl, C. Synapses in the network: Learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krackhardt, D.; Hanson, J. Informal Networks the Company behind the Charts; Harvard College Review: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1993; Available online: https://hbr.org/1993/07/informal-networks-the-company-behind-the-chart (accessed on 5 March 2019).
- Mead, S.P. Using social network analysis to visualize project teams. Proj. Manag. J. 2001, 32, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cross, R.; Parker, A. The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Prell, C.; Hubacek, K.; Reed, M. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2009, 22, 501–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mok, K.Y.; Shen, G.Q.; Yang, R.J.; Li, C.Z. Investigating key challenges in major public engineering projects by a network-theory based analysis of stakeholder concerns: A case study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2017, 35, 78–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, L. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Netw. 1979, 1, 215–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ove, F. Using centrality modeling in network surveys. Soc. Netw. 2002, 24, 385. [Google Scholar]
- Brass Daniel, J.; Borgatti Stephen, P. Social Networks at Work (SIOP Organizational Frontiers Series), 1st ed.; Routledge Publisher: New York, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Knoke, D.; Kuklinski, J.H. Network analysis. In Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences; Sage: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
- Narsalay, R.; Kavathekar, J.; Light, D. A Hands-Off Approach to Open Innovation Doesn’t Work. 2016. Available online: https://hbr.org/2016/05/a-hands-off-approach-to-open-innovation-doesnt-work (accessed on 4 March 2020).
- Ng, D.; Law, K. Impacts of informal networks on innovation performance: Evidence in Shanghai. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2015, 9, 56–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arthur, C. Tech Giants May Be Huge, but Nothing Matches Big Data. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/23/tech-giants-data (accessed on 20 January 2021).
- Bhageshpur, K. Data Is the New Oil—And That’s a Good Thing. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2019/11/15/data-is-the-new-oil-and-thats-a-good-thing/?sh=44f0b44c7304 (accessed on 10 January 2021).
- European Parliament. Is Data the New Oil? Competition Issues in the Digital Economy. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/646117/EPRS_BRI(2020)646117_EN.pdf (accessed on 7 January 2021).
- Arena, M.; Cross, R.; Sims, J.; Uhl-Bien, M. How to Catalyze Innovation in Your Organization. 2017. Available online: https://www.robcross.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/SMR-how-to-catalyze-innovation-in-your-organization-connected-commons.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2021).
- Santos, R.; Abreu, A.; Anes, V. Developing a green product-based in an open innovation environment. Case study: Electrical vehicle. In Collaborative Networks and Digital Transformation; IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Camarinha-Matos, L., Afsarmanesh, H., Antonelli, D., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 568. [Google Scholar]
- Ballinger, G.; Craig, E.; Cross, R.; Gray, P. A stitch in time saves nine: Leveraging networks to reduce the costs of turnover. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2011, 53, 111–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|Project Risk Types||What They Mean||How to Manage Them|
|(1) Event Risk||Risks related to something that has not yet happened, and it may indeed not happen at all, but if it does, it will surely impact project objectives.||Tools and techniques for identifying, assessing, treating, and monitoring risks, supported by well-known risk management standards and best practices.|
|(2) Variability Risk||Risk characterized by a given number of possible known outcomes; however, no one knows exactly which one will take place.||Advanced risk analysis models such as the Monte Carlo simulation.|
|(3) Ambiguity Risk||Risks that arise from lack of knowledge (know-how and know-what). They may include use of the latest project technology, and market and competitor capability or intentions, among other things.||Lessons learned, prototyping, and simulating techniques.|
|(4) Emergent Risk||Risk that are just unable to be seen or predicted, because they are outside a person’s mindset, and usually arise from game-changers and paradigm-shifters, such as disruptive inventions.||Efficient contingency planning.|
|Risk Management Steps According to the ISO 31000:2018 Standard ||Proposed Model Process Equivalent Steps|
|Step 1: establish scope, context, and criteria||Define scope (project stakeholders’ behaviors across a project lifecycle) and establish information collection process (mails, surveys, etc.) to map the four critical project social networks (communication, problem-solving, advice, and trust).|
|Step 2: risk identification||Apply SNA centrality metrics to collected data, to quantitatively measure different behavioral patterns from project stakeholders.|
|Step 3: risk analysis||Analyze the results and correlate them with project evolution and desired or established collaborative patterns.|
|Step 4: risk evaluation||Evaluate the impact of identified collaborative behaviors in project outputs and outcomes in two dimensions—threats and opportunities.|
|Step 5: risk treatment||Define and implement strategies to support, correct, or adjust identified behavioral patterns.|
|Step 6: monitoring, & reviewing||Continuously monitor implemented supportive or corrective measures, in order to access their effectiveness and record lessons learned.|
|(1) Communication||The mapping of the communication network in a project social network enables one to analyze aspects related to how effective, efficient, and centralized (or de-centralized) the communication that occurs between the different project stakeholders that work together to deliver projects is. Aspects such as frequency, intensity, reach, and broadness are entitled to be analyzed. For this matter, data from project email exchange, surveys or questionnaires, or observations can be used to map the communication of a project social network.|
|(2) Problem-solving||The mapping of the problem-solving network in a project social network enables one to identify critical partners or sub-networks, whereby expertise flows regarding project-related matters. Aspects such as frequency, intensity, reach, and diversity are entitled to be analyzed in the problem-solving network. For this matter, data from project email exchange, surveys or questionnaires, or observations can be used to map the project problem-solving of a project social network.|
|(3) Advice||The mapping of the advice network in a project social network enables one to identify key project partners or subnetworks, whereby support and some project matter expertise flows. Aspects such as intensity (translated into dependency), broadness, and diversity are entitled to be analyzed in the advice network. For this matter, data from project surveys or questionnaires, or observations can be used to map the project advice network of a project social network.|
|(4) Trust||The mapping of the trust network in a project social network enables one to identify critical project partners or sub-networks, whereby trust and support (translated into professional and personal) is established. Aspects such as intensity, frequency, confidence, empowerment, and reliability are entitled to be analyzed in the trust network. For this matter, data from project surveys or questionnaires, or observations can be used to map the project trust of a project social network.|
|Critical Project Social Networks||Data Collecting Method||Project Social Network Analysis Metrics and Objectives|
|(1) Communication||Emails: All exchanged email data (sent and received) between all participating project stakeholders related to project information regarding a given project phase. To be collected at the end of each project time mtn.||Objective: Identify who is central and who is peripherical within the project email exchange network.|
SNA Metric: Weighted in-degree
= total weighted degree of an entity within a graph
n = total number of entities within a graph for i = 1 …, n
xji = number of links and their weight from entity j to entity i, where i ≠ j, and vice versa, function of directed or undirected graph
|(2) Problem-Solving||Survey: Addressed to all project stakeholders’ members that have participated in a given project phase. Data is collected at the end of each project time mtn.||Objective: Identify how the problem-solving network is established across the project social network.|
SNA Metric: In-degree
= total degree of an entity within a graph
n = total number of entities within a graph for i = 1 …, n
xji = number of links from entity j to entity i, where i ≠ j, and vice-versa, function of directed or undirected graph
|(3) Advice||Observation: All project stakeholders’ dynamic interactions regarding the search for advice concerning project related matters observed on-site. Data is collected across a period of time ptn.||Objective: Identify how the advice network is established across the project social network.|
SNA Metric: In-degree (see Equation (b))
|(4) Trust||Survey: Addressed to all of an organization’s members that have participated in a given project phase. Data is collected at the end of each project time mtn.||Objective: Identify who trusts who, regarding project related information.|
SNA Metric: In-degree (see Equation (b))
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).