Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Guiding Principles
- Chapter 1 The Rise and Fall of the Planning Fallacy
- Chapter 2 Unveiling the Hiding Hand
- Chapter 3 Voyages of Discovery
- Chapter 4 Temporal Structuring and Project Behavior
- Chapter 5 Managing Project Complexity and Uncertainty through Dynamic and Systemic Stakeholder Modeling
- Part II Deviating from Plans
- Part III Practical Tips
- Index
- References
Chapter 4 - Temporal Structuring and Project Behavior
from Part I - Guiding Principles
Published online by Cambridge University Press: aN Invalid Date NaN
Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Guiding Principles
- Chapter 1 The Rise and Fall of the Planning Fallacy
- Chapter 2 Unveiling the Hiding Hand
- Chapter 3 Voyages of Discovery
- Chapter 4 Temporal Structuring and Project Behavior
- Chapter 5 Managing Project Complexity and Uncertainty through Dynamic and Systemic Stakeholder Modeling
- Part II Deviating from Plans
- Part III Practical Tips
- Index
- References
Summary
Project management essentially involves temporal work, in other words, the purposive effort to orient the temporal structures that guide action around given tasks. Yet, projects often involve participants or stakeholders holding different temporal orientations that may be more or less compatible with proposed temporal structures. In this paper we consider how different forms of temporal structuring influence project behavior (i.e., how participants engage with projects, and how projects play out to produce outcomes). Specifically, building on a review of the literature on projects and temporality, we explore how and why the socially constructed nature of project tasks (open-ended vs. closed-ended) interacts with efforts at temporal structuring (open vs. closed) to orient participants’ actions, with varying consequences for behaviors and outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of future research directions aimed at better understanding the relations between temporal structuring and project behavior.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior , pp. 71 - 83Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Alimadadi, S., Davies, A., and Tell, F. (2022). A palace fit for the future: Desirability in temporal work. Strategic Organization, 20(1), 20–50.10.1177/14761270211012021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alioua, H., and Simon, F. (2017). Managing time pacing in organizations transitioning to a project-based mode-3 cases studies of two multinational companies. International Journal of Project Management, 35(8), 1427–1443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ancona, D., and Chong, C.-L. (1996). Entrainment: Pace, cycle, and rhythm in organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 251–284.Google Scholar
Augustine, G. L., Soderstrom, S., Milner, D., and Weber, K. (2019). Constructing a distant future: Imaginaries in geoengineering. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R. M. (2010). Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: A systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 466–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R. M. (2016). Stepping in and stepping out: Strategic alliance partner reconfiguration and the unplanned termination of complex projects. Strategic Management Journal, 37(9), 1919–1941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R. M., Boroş, S., Kenis, P., and Oerlemans, L. A. (2013). It’s only temporary: Time frame and the dynamics of creative project teams. British Journal of Management, 24(3), 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, R. M., DeFillippi, R., Schwab, A., and Sydow, J. (2016). Temporary organizing: Promises, processes, problems. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1703–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bansal, P., Reinecke, J., Suddaby, R., and Langley, A. (2022). Temporal work: The strategic organization of time. Strategic Organization, 20(1), 6–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechky, B. A. (2003). Object lessons: Workplace artifacts as representations of occupational jurisdiction. American Journal of Sociology, 109(3), 720–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckert, J. (2016). Imagined futures. Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674545878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berends, H., van Burg, E., and Garud, R. (2021). Pivoting or persevering with venture ideas: Recalibrating temporal commitments. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(4), 106126.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2021.106126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blagoev, B., and Schreyogg, G. (2019). Why do extreme work hours persist? Temporal uncoupling as a new way of seeing. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1818–1847.10.5465/amj.2017.1481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brookes, N., Sage, D., Dainty, A., Locatelli, G., and Whyte, J. (2017). An island of constancy in a sea of change: Rethinking project temporalities with long-term megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(7), 1213–1224.10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.05.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunet, M., Fachin, F., and Langley, A. (2021). Studying projects processually. International Journal of Project Management, 39(8), 834–848.10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucher, S., and Langley, A. (2016). The interplay of reflective and experimental spaces in interrupting and reorienting routine dynamics. Organization Science, 27(3), 594–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, C. M., and Morley, M. J. (2016). On temporary organizations: A review, synthesis and research agenda. Human Relations, 69(6), 1235–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Das, T. K. (2006). Strategic alliance temporalities and partner opportunism. British Journal of Management, 17, 1–21.10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00482.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A., and Mackenzie, I. (2014). Project complexity and systems integration: Constructing the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics Games. International Journal of Project Management, 32(5), 773–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delisle, J. (2019). Uncovering temporal underpinnings of project management standards. International Journal of Project Management, 37(8), 968–978.10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.09.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deuten, J. J., and Rip, A. (2000). Narrative infrastructure in product creation processes. Organization, 7(1), 69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dille, T., Hernes, T., and Vaagaasar, A. L. (2022). Stuck in temporal translation? Challenges of discrepant temporal structures in interorganizational project collaboration. Organization Studies. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/01708406221137841.Google Scholar
Dille, T., Söderlund, J., and Clegg, S. (2018). Temporal conditioning and the dynamics of inter-institutional projects. International Journal of Project Management, 36(5), 673–686.10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engwall, M., and Westling, G. (2004). Peripety in an R&D drama: Capturing a turnaround in project dynamics. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1557–1578.10.1177/0170840604048000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkenberg, J., Stensaker, I. G., Meyer, C. B., and Haueng, A. C. (2005). When change becomes excessive research in organizational change and development. Emerald Group.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., Budzier, A., and Lunn, D. (2021). Regression to the tail: Why the Olympics blow up. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 53(2), 233–260.10.1177/0308518X20958724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garud, R., Gehman, J., Kumaraswamy, A., and Tuertscher, P. (2016). From the process of innovation to innovation as process (pp. 451–466). In Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H. (eds.). The SAGE handbook of process organization studies. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiger, D., Danner-Schröder, A., and Kremser, W. (2021). Getting ahead of time – performing temporal boundaries to coordinate routines under temporal uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(1), 220–264.10.1177/0001839220941010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gemino, A., Reich, B. H., and Serrador, P. M. (2021). Agile, traditional, and hybrid approaches to project success: Is hybrid a poor second choice? Project Management Journal, 52(2), 161–175.10.1177/8756972820973082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geraldi, J., Stjerne, I., and Oehmen, J. (2020). Acting in time: Temporal work enacting tensions at the interface between temporary and permanent organisations (pp. 81–103). In Braun, T. and Lampel, J. (eds.). Tensions and paradoxes in temporary organizing (Research in the xociology of organizations, vol. 67). Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.10.2307/256496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gersick, C. J. (1989). Marking Time: Predictable transitions in task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 274–309.10.2307/256363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabher, G., and Thiel, J. (2014). Coping with a self-induced shock: The heterarchic organization of the London Olympic Games 2012. Social Sciences, 3(3), 527–548.10.3390/socsci3030527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustavsson, T. K., and Hallin, A. (2015). Goal seeking and goal oriented projects – trajectories of the temporary organisation. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8(2), 368–378.10.1108/IJMPB-03-2014-0027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassard, J. (1991). Aspects of time in organization. Human Relations, 44(2), 105–125.10.1177/001872679104400201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbolling, S., Deken, F., Berends, H., and Tuertscher, P. (2022). Process-based temporal coordination in multiparty collaboration for societal challenges. Strategic Organization, 20(1), 135–163.10.1177/1476127021992705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huemann, M., Keegan, A., and Turner, J. R. (2007). Human resource management in the project-oriented company: A review. International Journal of Project Management, 25(3), 315–323.10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huemann, M., and Silvius, G. (2017). Projects to create the future: Managing projects meets sustainable development. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1066–1070.10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.04.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., Love, P. E., and Pinto, J. K. (2022). Moving beyond the planning fallacy: The emergence of a new principle of project behavior. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 3310–3325.10.1109/TEM.2020.3040526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., and Munro, L. T. (2022). Tackling grand challenges with projects: Five insights and a research agenda for project management theory and practice. International Journal of Project Management, 40(6), 601–607.10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.05.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalff, Y. (2022). Managing projects as a mode of temporal ordering. Performative organising of time and temporality in projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 15(1), 82–101.10.1108/IJMPB-05-2021-0132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanitz, R., Huy, Q. N., Backmann, J., and Hoegl, M. (2022). No change is an island: How interferences between change initiatives evoke inconsistencies that undermine implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 65(2), 683–710.10.5465/amj.2019.0413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, S., and Orlikowski, W. (2013). Temporal work in strategy making. Organization Science, 24(4), 965–995.10.1287/orsc.1120.0792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremser, W., and Blagoev, B. (2021). The dynamics of prioritizing: How actors temporally pattern complex role-routine ecologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(2), 339–379.10.1177/0001839220948483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunisch, S., Bartunek, J. M., Mueller, J., and Huy, Q. N. (2017). Time in strategic change research. Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 1005–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtinen, J., Locatelli, G., Sainati, T., Artto, K., and Evans, B. (2022). The grand challenge: Effective anti-corruption measures in projects. International Journal of Project Management, 40(4), 347–361.10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lifshitz-Assaf, H., Lebovitz, S., and Zalmanson, L. (2021). Minimal and adaptive coordination: How hackathons’ projects accelerate innovation without killing it. Academy of Management Journal, 64(3), 684–715.10.5465/amj.2017.0712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ligthart, R., Oerlemans, L., and Noorderhaven, N. (2016). In the shadows of time: A case study of flexibility behaviors in an interorganizational project. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1721–1743.10.1177/0170840616655487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindkvist, L., Soderlund, J., and Tell, F. (1998). Managing product development projects: On the significance of fountains and deadlines. Organization Studies, 19(6), 931–951.10.1177/017084069801900602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locatelli, G., Mariani, G., Sainati, T., and Greco, M. (2017). Corruption in public projects and megaprojects: There is an elephant in the room! International Journal of Project Management, 35(3), 252–268.10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.09.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundin, R., and Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the temporary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11(4), 437–455.10.1016/0956-5221(95)00036-UCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGivern, G., Dopson, S., Ferlie, E., Fischer, M., Fitzgerald, L., Ledger, J., and Bennett, C. (2018). The silent politics of temporal work: A case study of a management consultancy project to redesign public health care. Organization Studies, 39(8), 1007–1030.10.1177/0170840617708004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., and Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups (pp. 166–195). In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.). Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and research. Sage.10.4135/9781452243610.n9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, M. (2015). The mega-event syndrome: Why so much goes wrong in mega-event planning and what to do about it. Journal of the American Planning Association, 81(1), 6–17.10.1080/01944363.2015.1038292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nachbagauer, A. (2022). Synchronous and diachronic timing: Insights into managing projects from disaster management and fast-response organizations. Project Management Journal, 53(2), 146–160.10.1177/87569728221079414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okhuysen, G. A., and Waller, M. J. (2002). Focusing on midpoint transitions: An analysis of boundary conditions. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1056–1065.10.2307/3069330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J., and Yates, J. (2002). It’s about time: Temporal structuring in organizations. Organization Science, 13(6), 684–700.10.1287/orsc.13.6.684.501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitsis, T. S., Clegg, S. R., Marosszeky, M., and Rura-Polley, T. (2003). Constructing the Olympic dream: A future perfect strategy of project management. Organization Science, 14(5), 574–590.10.1287/orsc.14.5.574.16762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppo, L., Zhou, K. Z., and Ryu, S. (2008). Alternative origins to interorganizational trust: An interdependence perspective on the shadow of the past and the shadow of the future. Organization Science, 19(1), 39–55.10.1287/orsc.1070.0281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). 6th ed. Project Management Institute.Google Scholar
Ross, J., and Staw, B. M. (1986). Expo 86: An escalation prototype. Administrative Science Quarterly, 274–297.10.2307/2392791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royer, I. (2003). Why bad projects are so hard to kill. Harvard Business Review, 81(2), 48–56, 123.Google ScholarPubMed
Sergeeva, N., and Winch, G. M. (2021). Project narratives that potentially perform and change the future. Project Management Journal, 52(3), 264–277.10.1177/8756972821995340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipp, A. J., and Jansen, K. J. (2021). The “other” time: A review of the subjective experience of time in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 15(1), 299–334.10.5465/annals.2018.0142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W. K., and Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of management Review, 36(2), 381–403.Google Scholar
Söderlund, J. (2010). Knowledge entrainment and project management: The case of large-scale transformation projects. International Journal of Project Management, 28(2), 130–141.10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.11.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Söderlund, J. (2013). Pluralistic and processual understandings of projects and project organizing: Towards theories of project temporality (pp. 117–135). In Drouin, N., Müller, R., and Shankar, S. (eds.). Novel approaches to organizational project management research: Translational and transformational. Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
Söderlund, J., and Pemsel, S. (2022). Changing times for digitalization: The multiple roles of temporal shifts in enabling organizational change. Human Relations, 75(5), 871–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stjerne, I. S., Söderlund, J., and Minbaeva, D. (2019). Crossing times: Temporal boundary-spanning practices in interorganizational projects. International Journal of Project Management, 37(2), 347–365.10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.09.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stjerne, I. S., and Svejenova, S. (2016). Connecting temporary and permanent organizing: Tensions and boundary work in a series of film projects. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1771–1792.10.1177/0170840616655492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swärd, A. (2016). Trust, reciprocity, and actions: The development of trust in temporary inter-organizational relations. Organization Studies, 37(12), 1841–1860.10.1177/0170840616655488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavory, I., and Elisasoph, N. (2013). Coordinating futures: Towards a theory of anticipation. Americal Journal of Sociology, 118(4), 908–942.10.1086/668646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trope, K., and Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 110(3), 403–421.10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tryggestad, K., Justesen, L., and Mouritsen, J. (2013). Project temporalities: How frogs can become stakeholders. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 6(1), 69–87.10.1108/17538371311291035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaagaasar, A. L., Hernes, T., and Dille, T. (2020). The challenges of implementing temporal shifts in temporary organizations: Implications of a situated temporal view. Project Management Journal, 51(4), 420–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waller, M. J., Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E., and Giambatista, R. C. (2002). Watching the clock: Group pacing behavior under dynamic deadlines. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1046–1055.10.2307/3069329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whyte, J., and Nussbaum, T. (2020). Transition and temporalities: Spanning temporal boundaries as projects end and operations begin. Project Management Journal, 51(5), 505–521.10.1177/8756972820919002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yakura, E. (2002). Charting time: Timelines as temporal boundary objects Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 956–970.10.2307/3069324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this book
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.