|
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management |
| By: | Svetlana Klessova (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - COMUE UCA - COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur); Sebastian Engell (TU - Technische Universität Dortmund [Dortmund]); Catherine Thomas (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - COMUE UCA - COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015-2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur) |
| Abstract: | Publicly funded multi-actor research, development and innovation projects are a setting where a network of multiple organizational actors form a temporary consortium to jointly create new knowledge and marketupstream innovations. The couplings between the organizational actors and subgroups of these actors represent joint work that leads to flows of knowledge and flows of activities. The dynamics of the couplings in this empirical context and their implications are not well understood yet. Using an inductive comparative multiple case study of projects funded in European Research and Innovation Programmes, we investigated 4 projects with 54 organizational actors, which produced 50 innovations. The evolutions of all couplings went through the same phases, although the temporality of the phases differed. We identified eight types of evolutions of couplings and their underlying generative mechanisms. These evolutions led to different, mostly negative implications on the planned collaborative innovations. Particularly, we observed a systematic degradation of the couplings that were planned to connect subgroups of organizational actors. Over time, the projects became less collaborative than planned, and they have a tendency to fragment into isolated activities by subgroups of actors. Based on these findings, we propose an emerging process model which helps to better understand how and why the couplings evolve in multi-actor RDI projects. |
| Keywords: | Multi-actor projects,Research,Development,Collaborative innovation,Process,Evolution,Tie,Module,Interface,Output,Qualitative research,Coupling,Interdependency,Collaboration |
| Date: | 2022 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03690108&r= |
| By: | Thomas Bonvillain (I4CE - Institut de l’Économie pour le Climat); Claudine Foucherot (I4CE - Institut de l’Économie pour le Climat); Valentin Bellassen (CESAER - Centre d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales Appliquées à l'Agriculture et aux Espaces Ruraux - AgroSup Dijon - Institut National Supérieur des Sciences Agronomiques, de l'Alimentation et de l'Environnement - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement) |
| Abstract: | French agriculture lacks the capacity to single-handedly address the many challenges it faces. Its necessary transformation can only proceed if additional external funding is made available. Carbon certification frameworks, by providing guarantees on the veracity of emission reductions (ER) and the additionality of projects, are one of the tools to provide new financial resources to the sector. France has had its own carbon certification framework since 2018, overseen by the Ministry of the Ecological Transition: the French Low-Carbon Standard (Label Bas-Carbone, LBC)1. The development of sectoral methodologies is progressing rapidly and projects have already received the standard, but it has become apparent that several clarifications are necessary to facilitate the financing of agricultural projects by agribusinesses. A recurring question asked by potential funders is "What am I allowed to say and do when financing certified low-carbon projects?" And underlying this question are many others: are there double counting problems surrounding voluntary credits and State inventories? Is there a need to distinguish between ER from inside or outside the value chain in the context of a carbon offset approach? What are the best methods of project communication when several funders are involved? These questions are not specific to the LBC, as they concern the functioning of all voluntary carbon markets, and nor are they new. However, they remain topical and are even the subject of numerous international debates, although no consensus has been reached. Paradoxically, these discussions, held in the pursuit of rigour and raising ambitions, are delaying the financing of projects. In the short term it is therefore necessary to provide operational answers to funders, at least in the specific LBC context. In France, these issues have mainly been raised by the agri-food industries, which is why this document focuses specifically on this sector. Taking this into account, the aim of this study is to provide practical answers to agri-food companies that are wondering what they are entitled to say or do when financing projects within the LBC framework. Through an analysis of five project funding case types, we make recommendations on the structuring of the carbon assessment and reporting with which financing companies can engage, whether through a carbon offsetting approach or a contribution to the climate effort. These technical recommendations made for each case type stem from three general recommendations: when financing low-carbon projects, one must seek to be cooperative, pragmatic and transparent. Cooperation Neither the private sector nor the State alone has the means to finance all the projects needed to achieve the objectives that France has set itself in the framework of the Paris Agreement. Partnerships between value chains, between industrial sectors, between territories, between the private and public sectors, should be facilitated and encouraged to finance as many projects as possible. Presenting oneself as the sole beneficiary of a financed project in terms of carbon accounting is often misleading and can be detrimental to project development. In the carbon field, everyone benefits from the actions of others. So much the better if "collateral benefits", such as Scope 3 reductions for a third party, occur during a project's implementation. But beware: only funders can claim responsibility for ER. Pragmatism Guidelines cannot be based on rules that are unverifiable in practice, as we see for the issue of double counting between Scope 3 carbon reporting and voluntary credits. It must be remembered that the framework within which companies act on climate change inherently involves a degree of uncertainty, which is limited and controlled, but nevertheless real. Perfect is the enemy of good: the search for rigour and high standards must not be at the expense of project funding. Transparency Transparency is the most important point and the counterpart of the first two. Being transparent about actions undertaken is the best guarantee of credibility regarding climate impact. Agribusinesses must first make a clear distinction between their carbon reporting on the one hand, and the ER purchased or financed by the organisation on the other. Furthermore, they should report not only in tCO2e, the commonly used indicator, but also in euros, to show the amount spent on project financing. This provides additional information. Ideally, both figures should be provided, and not one or the other. Indeed, a contribution made at a carbon credit price of 5 euros, for example, is not equal to one with a credit price of 100 euros. Finally, a funder's communication should not anticipate the certification of ER. As soon as funding has been committed, it is possible to report in terms of euros. However, it is not until ER have been acknowledged by the Ministry that the volume of ER can be made public. |
| Keywords: | Carbon offsetting,Communication,Label Bas-Carbone,Low-carbon standard,Agriculture |
| Date: | 2021–09–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-03613848&r= |
| By: | Robin Le Conte Des Floris (CRI - Centre de Recherche en Informatique - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres); Cédric Dalmasso (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Pierre Jouvelot (CRI - Centre de Recherche en Informatique - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres) |
| Abstract: | Organizations, be they companies, governmental or non-governmental bodies or even associations, manage their projects on the basis of the value of indicators that are obtained automatically or filled in by the various project stakeholders, including the project managers. In this paper, we experimentally study the effect that employees' motivation can have on the data collection process related to project management. By sending two different types of email messages to 177 project managers in a large engineering company, one using the classic corporate format, the other mentioning an academic research objective on the subject, using a somewhat more leisurely presentation style and asking only for volunteer participation, we quantitatively assess the impact of the type of stimulus (one relying on extrinsic motivation, the other, intrinsic) on the overall data collection process. Our results suggest that the type of incentive has no significant effect on the amount of data collected. However, we note a significant effect on the way in which project performance is qualified according to the type of stimulus. In particular, the evaluation of the company's maturity with regard to projects or their 2 EURAM 2022 success is significantly different depending on the stimulation mode. We were thus able to quantify the extent of the differences induced by the employees' motivation, extrinsic or intrinsic. The results obtained confirm the difficulty of characterizing project performance by means of self-provided indicators by highlighting the effects induced by the context of acquisition of these data. |
| Keywords: | Data quality,motivation,project management |
| Date: | 2022–06–15 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03662794&r= |
| By: | Karamanis, Dimitris |
| Abstract: | This paper employs a panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) approach to investigate the relationship among military expenditure, investment, and economic growth, over the period after the enforcement of the Maastricht treaty (1994–2018) in 25 European countries that participate in the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO). By using the Louvain community detection algorithm on the network links that have been established through defence partnerships in PESCO projects, two different country clusters emerge. Findings suggest that military expenditures can stimulate economic growth but the effects may not be common for all Member States, which might benefit from the involvement in joint defence projects to maximize the effectiveness of their defence spending. |
| Keywords: | defence partnerships; military expenditures; investments; economic growth; PVAR; PESCO |
| JEL: | H56 C33 O47 |
| Date: | 2022–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:115485&r= |
| By: | Philipp Brunner; Igor Letina; Armin Schmutzler |
| Abstract: | This paper provides a novel theory of research joint ventures for financially constrained firms. When firms choose R&D portfolios, an RJV can help to coordinate research efforts, reducing investments in duplicate projects. This can free up resources, increase the variety of pursued projects and thereby increase the probability of discovering the innovation. RJVs improve innovation outcomes when market competition is weak and external financing conditions are bad. An RJV may increase the innovation probability and nevertheless lower total R&D costs. RJVs that increase innovation tend to be profitable, but innovation-reducing RJVs also exist. Finally, we compare RJVs to innovation-enhancing mergers. |
| Keywords: | Innovation, research joint ventures, financial constraints, mergers, intensity of competition, licensing |
| JEL: | L13 L24 O31 |
| Date: | 2022–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zur:econwp:416&r= |
| By: | Agathe Gilain (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Pascal Le Masson (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Benoit Weil (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - MINES ParisTech - École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique); Nafissa Jibet; Alexandre Bekhradi (IRT SystemX - IRT SystemX); Paul Labrogere (IRT SystemX - IRT SystemX); Patrice Aknin (IRT SystemX - IRT SystemX) |
| Abstract: | Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) are agents which conduct ‘extra-university research' at the boundary between industry and science, acting as an intermediary between the two. Their expected impact is primarily industrial: they are supposed to support and enhance the competitiveness and innovation capabilities of industry. RTOs position of intermediary between science and industry is delicate, since their role is neither to substitute for the industrial partners who conduct their NPD projects and develop innovations, nor to substitute for the conduct of basic research by universities. In particular, one major pitfall for RTO pointed out by the literature is the risk that the outputs of RTOs activities are too research-oriented and fail to meet industrial needs. In this context, the literature tends to recommend that to remain manageable, the intermediation role of RTO between science and industry should be limited to situations of low/moderate uncertainty. The resulting impacts will be modest, but under control for the RTO and highly-valued by industrial firms. This paper focuses on the French IRT (Institute for Technological Research) SystemX that seems to stand out within the portray of RTOs. Created in 2012, SystemX conducts collaborative research projects aimed at accompanying and accelerating the transformation of industrial sectors in the face the digital transition. Internally, SystemX has intuited that it is inventing a new form of science-industry coupling. Thus, this paper involves mobilizes the theoretical frameworks of design theory, with the aim of characterizing SystemX model of action within its industrial and scientific ecosystem, and testing the hypothesis according to which SystemX has developed capabilities to manage situations the level of uncertainty of which goes beyond moderate uncertainty. The study reveals that SystemX manages science-industry couplings which do not only involve moderate uncertainty, but also unknowns, associated with which there is a high potential of ‘double impact' (simultaneously a scientific and an industrial impact). SystemX is able to articulate the action model associated with these science-industry couplings in the unknown with three other action models (involving lower degrees of unknown). An in-depth case study focusing on one SystemX project shows that the implementation of the four action models and their articulation requires methodical and progressive processes of structuring and creating knowledge: these processes allow the construction (and not the simple identification) of common locks and new disciplines in the unknown. These could be seen as first insights regarding the conditions required for ‘double impact RTOs'. |
| Date: | 2022–06–15 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03686580&r= |
| By: | Corey Duncan (FEMTO-ST - Franche-Comté Électronique Mécanique, Thermique et Optique - Sciences et Technologies (UMR 6174) - UTBM - Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbeliard - ENSMM - Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Mécanique et des Microtechniques - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UFC - Université de Franche-Comté - UBFC - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE]); Robin Roche (FEMTO-ST - Franche-Comté Électronique Mécanique, Thermique et Optique - Sciences et Technologies (UMR 6174) - UTBM - Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbeliard - ENSMM - Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Mécanique et des Microtechniques - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UFC - Université de Franche-Comté - UBFC - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE]); Samir Jemei (FEMTO-ST - Franche-Comté Électronique Mécanique, Thermique et Optique - Sciences et Technologies (UMR 6174) - UTBM - Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbeliard - ENSMM - Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Mécanique et des Microtechniques - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UFC - Université de Franche-Comté - UBFC - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE]); Marie-Cécile Péra (FEMTO-ST - Franche-Comté Électronique Mécanique, Thermique et Optique - Sciences et Technologies (UMR 6174) - UTBM - Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbeliard - ENSMM - Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Mécanique et des Microtechniques - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UFC - Université de Franche-Comté - UBFC - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE]) |
| Abstract: | Decarbonization of the European energy networks is critical to meet Commission targets in the coming decades. The presented study aims to contribute to this by analysing one of the proposed solutions: power-to-gas. A technoeconomic model is created for the purposes of evaluating specific projects on their feasibility in terms of local constraints and opportunities, using a current project as a template for model generation and analysing different possible configurations in 8 operational scenarios. Five metrics were used for scenario analysis: levelized cost of methane, minimum selling price, operational hours, hydrogen tank size and capital cost. The results from the analysis indicate that, in terms of the stated project, synthetic natural gas production and grid injection along with on-site mobility applications provide the best economical result. However, selling prices of synthetic natural gas obtained are one magnitude higher than current natural gas prices, indicating government support is required for further development. Future projections of electrolyser efficiency and equipment capital costs will greatly reduce production costs, giving promise for feasible business cases in the coming years. |
| Keywords: | Power-to-gas,System modelling,Techno-economical analysis,Synthetic natural gas |
| Date: | 2022 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03692975&r= |
| By: | Corti, Francesco; Núñez Ferrer, Jorge; Ruiz de la Ossa, Tomás; Liscai, Alessandro |
| Abstract: | One year has now passed since the adoption of the RRF Regulation and most of EU Member States have now started to implement their recovery plans. Yet, many questions remain unanswered about the plans’ actual capacity to deliver their stated objectives. The complexity and heterogeneity of the plans makes it not only difficult to compare and assess them, but also raises doubts on existing capacity to monitor their implementation. Building on the methodological approach and the experience gained from the previous study we presented in September 2021, this updated paper further expands our initial analysis, including two new countries (Austria and Belgium), and introduces new insights on how far the plans cover entirely new investments or are being simply earmarked for previously budgeted expenditure. This paper is part of the ongoing CEPS Recovery and Resilience Reflection Project. |
| Date: | 2022–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:eps:cepswp:35879&r= |
| By: | Marcos Segantini (Universidad ORT Uruguay. Facultad de Administración y Ciencias Sociales. Departmento de Economía); Lori A. Dickes (Clemson University) |
| Abstract: | There is extensive evidence of differential factors in accessing external capital for entrepreneurs. The effects of receiving monitored external funds on the survival probability of entrepreneurial projects have also been well-described by specialized literature. However, it has not yet been analyzed how entrepreneurs acquire different kinds of funds at different stages during the entrepreneurial process and their relationships with entrepreneurship success. This paper aims to fill these gaps by analyzing the relationship between a broad set of entrepreneurial tangible and intangible assets and their impact on receiving external funding several times during new ventures' gestation. Receiving external funding is a critical factor for entrepreneurial success. This article extends from the Matthew effect theory, explaining how initial advantages lead to further cumulative advantages in external funding access. |
| Keywords: | entrepreuneurship, external funding, event history. |
| Date: | 2020–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:avs:wpaper:123&r= |
| By: | Brauweiler, Hans-Christian; Yerimpasheva, Aida |
| Abstract: | The BRI initiative presents a colossal opportunity for landlocked Kazakhstan to become a central logistics hub. However, this prospect is overshadowed by geopolitical risks that have escalated since the beginning of 2022. The Ukrainian crisis increased geopolitical tensions on the Eurasian continent and worldwide. Furthermore, it disrupted respectively delayed logistics, as the borders both between Russian Federation and Belarussia on one side and many nations in Europe were practically closed, air traffic has to take huge diversions, increasing time and costs for the freight. A full-scale crisis has global consequences for states and people. Western companies have stopped their activities in Russia. Western countries have imposed unprecedentedly harsh sanctions on Russia. Supply chains can be broken. Chinese companies are concerned that their goods may be stopped at the border between Russia and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Because of close economic and political ties with the Russian Federation and membership in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), Kazakhstan is concerned with secondary sanctions. Actually, there is already some impact, as Russian Banks in Kazakhstan have to cope with difficulties in international payments, which rebounds to their (innocent, kazakh and international expatriate) customers. Companies face a particular business risk that can be referred to as "geopolitical risk." Geopolitical risks are becoming the main problem for the further development of the Eurasian region. |
| Keywords: | logistics,hub,geopolitical risks,projects,EAEU,BRI,SREB,cooperation,transport logistics complex |
| Date: | 2022 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:opodis:20222&r= |