|
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management |
| By: | Fey, Sascha |
| Abstract: | Carrying out innovation projects is no easy task in a world characterized by constant change and uncertainty. Adversities such as saving targets, budget cuts, interpersonal conflicts, absenteeism, or employee turnover can significantly impact project progress. Given these circumstances, the question is not "if" but rather "when" a project will be affected by such problems. The concept of resilience is a promising approach to dealing with difficulties in everyday project management. The goal of Innovation Resilience Behaviour, a specific form of resilience, is to equip projects with the necessary tools to detect deviations from the project plan as early as possible and take all necessary measures to get back on track. The existing literature on resilience has shown increasing interest in the topic during recent years. Emanating from social psychology, the construct has demonstrated relevance in other fields as well, such as organizational research. However, Innovation Resilience Behaviour as a specialized field in project management has not yet been examined in depth or empirically tested on a large scale beyond the seminal articles. As part of this study, the author examined 87 innovation projects of a large German logistics service provider, analyzing the relationship between Innovation Resilience Behaviour and project success, as well as four potential moderators (adversities, dispersion, use of communication media, technological innovativeness) and four possible antecedents (trust, identification, goal clarity, top management support) of Innovation Resilience Behaviour. The results show a clear and positive relationship between Innovation Resilience Behaviour and project success. However, three of the four expected moderators did not exhibit the predicted effects—only adversity had a moderating influence on the relationship between Innovation Resilience Behaviour and project success. Regarding the antecedents, this study demonstrates that Identification, goal clarity, and top management support have a significant positive influence on the development of Innovation Resilience Behaviour. The findings of this study contribute to the existing literature, particularly in the following ways: They expand and provide empirical validation of Innovation Resilience Behaviour beyond the previously published seminal articles. The study is conducted at the team level. Several researchers have previously pointed out that the team level has been largely neglected in studies on (innovation) projects in the corporate sector. Confirming Innovation Resilience Behaviour as an important factor for project success also provides team leaders, project managers, and executives with a useful and practical set of tools that allows them to respond individually and effectively to threats or deviations from the project plan. |
| Date: | 2026–05–27 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dar:wpaper:160986 |
| By: | Gyöngyi Loranth; Alan D. Morrison; Jing Zeng |
| Abstract: | Westudy how firms can design their organizational structures to overcome dynamic commitment problems when entering new markets. A manager exerts costly effort to first develop and subsequently manage an investment opportunity. Ex post, the firm underinvests in projects that generate high management rents. However, the prospect of those rents helps offset the manager’s initial project development cost, making ex ante commitment to invest optimal. Levered subsidiaries mitigate this time-consistency problem by introducing risk-shifting incentives that counteract underinvestment. Sub sidiaries are most valuable for projects that are costly to develop, have moderate man agement costs, and yield returns uncorrelated with existing business. |
| Keywords: | organizational structure, investment strategy, branch, subsidiary |
| JEL: | G32 G34 L22 |
| Date: | 2026–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bon:boncrc:crctr224_2025_770 |
| By: | D'Amico, Leonardo; Glaeser, Edward; Gyourko, Joseph; Kerr, William; Ponzetto, Giacomo |
| Abstract: | We document a Kuznets curve for construction productivity in 20th-century America. Homes built per construction worker remained stagnant between 1900 and 1940, boomed after World War II, and then plummeted after 1970. The productivity boom from 1940 to 1970 shows that nothing makes technological progress inherently impossible in construction. What stopped it? We present a model in which local land-use controls limit the size of building projects. This constraint reduces the equilibrium size of construction companies, reducing both scale economies and incentives to invest in innovation. Our model shows that, in a competitive industry, such inefficient reductions in firm size and technology investment are a distinctive consequence of restrictive project regulation, while classic regulatory barriers to entry increase firm size. The model is consistent with an extensive series of key facts about the nature of the construction sector. The post-1970 productivity decline coincides with increases in our best proxies for land-use regulation. The size of development projects is small today and has declined over time. The size of construction firms is also quite small, especially relative to other goods-producing firms, and smaller builders are less productive. Areas with stricter land use regulation have particularly small and unproductive construction establishments. Patenting activity in construction stagnated and diverged from other sectors. A back-of-the-envelope calculation indicates that, if half of the observed link between establishment size and productivity is causal, America’s residential construction firms would be approximately 60% more productive if their size distribution matched that of manufacturing. |
| Keywords: | Construction industry; Firm productivity; Land-use regulation; Housing |
| JEL: | D24 E23 L74 L78 R31 R38 R52 |
| Date: | 2024–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:19711 |
| By: | Bambe, Bao-We-Wal; Tamasiga, Phemelo |
| Abstract: | Climate mitigation and adaptation require substantial investment to advance sustainable development. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), mobilising such finance is particularly challenging for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) due to persistent market failures, including limited financial disclosure and weak credit-risk information. High upfront costs, uncertain returns and weak regulatory frameworks further constrain adoption of low-carbon technologies. While fiscal constraints and the capital-intensive transition underscore the need for private capital, traditional bank financing is restricted by long project horizons, high risk and macroeconomic instability. Blended finance and guarantees are key instruments for mobilising private investment in LMICs. Blended finance combines concessional public resources with private or additional public capital to mitigate profitability risks, while guarantees reduce perceived risk by covering partial losses, particularly for non-commercial risks. This policy brief assesses their role in scaling SME climate finance, alongside their limitations and context-specific applicability. Evidence suggests that leverage effects, especially for blended finance, are more modest than often assumed and are context dependent; nonetheless, these instruments remain relevant for de-risking SME finance, contingent on improved design and implementation. The policy brief advances the following recommendations: - Financial intermediaries should prioritise SMEs facing binding financing constraints that prevent projects with clear socio-economic and environmental benefits. Project selection should integrate financial and climate vulnerability, though assessment remains difficult in low-income countries (LICs). De-risking instruments should target specific constraints, with guarantees mitigating risks and blended finance supporting projects with insufficient risk-adjusted returns to attract private capital. Multilateral development banks (MDBs) and development finance institutions (DFIs) should ensure additionality, minimise concessionality and strengthen monitoring and transparency. - MDBs and DFIs should better align donor incentives with effective risk-sharing and flexible financing structures. Concessional senior loans dominate blended finance but have limited loss absorption, reducing effectiveness in high-risk environments. A more balanced mix, including subordinated debt, equity and guarantees, can improve risk allocation and crowd in private investors. Greater use of special purpose vehicles and off-balance-sheet structures can further expand financing capacity in fragile contexts. - MDBs and DFIs should strengthen coordination, standardisation and local engagement. Fragmentation in blended finance and guarantees increases complexity and transaction costs and deters institutional investors. Greater harmonisation across MDBs, DFIs and private investors would improve capital allocation and complementarity, while standardised procedures and contracts would streamline project preparation and scaling in LMICs. Governments in LMICs should address structural constraints, with MDBs and DFIs providing complementary de-risking and capacity-building support. Weak investment climates, shallow financial markets, poor project pipelines and weak credit information systems reduce the effectiveness of blended finance and guarantees, particularly in LICs. Governments should strengthen investment climates, deepen financial markets and improve SME capabilities, while MDBs and DFIs support local intermediaries and broader reforms. |
| Keywords: | Blended finance, guarantees, small and medium-sized enterprises, green finance, low- and middle-income countries, SDGs |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:idospb:342586 |
| By: | Khant, Ye Lin |
| Abstract: | Major international infrastructure programmes consistently exceed their approved cost baselines, not because data is unavailable, but because governance frameworks fail to act on it in time. This paper argues that Earned Value Management (EVM), augmented by artificial intelligence and embedded within a redesigned governance framework, would systematically close the gap between cost signal detection and decision-maker escalation. Drawing on two detailed case studies, HS2 High Speed Rail in the United Kingdom and the EU High-Speed Rail Network as audited by the European Court of Auditors, this paper applies a consistent thematic coding framework (T1–T5) to map cost tracking mechanisms, early warning failure points, governance failure types, AI intervention potential, and regulatory environment across two contrasting institutional contexts. The analysis finds that HS2 suffered a documented twelve-month lag between independent assurance reporting that the project was undeliverable and the sponsor formally accepting unaffordability, a governance failure of Type C (decision authority) compounded by Type D (incentive misalignment). The EU case reveals a structurally different but equally systemic failure: the absence of enforcement powers over cross-border project completion, universal cost overruns averaging 78% at line level, and cost-benefit analyses that functioned as administrative formalities rather than decision tools. [5-6] The paper proposes an AI-EVM governance framework comprising seven integrated components a Baseline Realism Validator, Cost Performance Index Monitor, Contractor Estimate Anomaly Detector, Assurance Report NLP Engine, Cross-Border Coordination Tracker, CBA Quality Screening Module, and Schedule Realism Modeller each mapped to a specific governance failure type with defined escalation triggers. The paper concludes with a four-phase implementation roadmap for national governments and multilateral development banks, and identifies the revisions required to FIDIC, NEC4, World Bank Procurement Regulations, and the EU TEN-T Regulation to make these frameworks AI-ready. |
| Keywords: | earned value management; infrastructure cost overrun; project governance; artificial intelligence; cost control; escalation; HS2; high-speed rail; public procurement |
| JEL: | H54 H57 H83 L74 O22 O33 |
| Date: | 2026–06–24 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:129713 |
| By: | David C. Vaidis (CLLE - Cognition, langues, langage, ergonomie - EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - UT2J - Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès - Comue de Toulouse - Communauté d'universités et établissements de Toulouse - UBM - Université Bordeaux Montaigne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - TMBI - Toulouse Mind & Brain Institut - UT2J - Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès - Comue de Toulouse - Communauté d'universités et établissements de Toulouse - EPE UT - Université de Toulouse - Comue de Toulouse - Communauté d'universités et établissements de Toulouse); Jacob Francisco Miranda (CSUEB - California State University [East Bay]); Erin Michelle Buchanan; Yu Fang Yang; Marta Kowal (UWr - University of Wrocław [Poland] = Uniwersytet Wrocławski [Polska] = Universität Breslau [Polen] = Université de Wrocław [Pologne]); Kathleen Schmidt (SIU - Southern Illinois University [Carbondale]); Marta Topor (UNIS - University of Surrey); Michał Misiak (UWr - University of Wrocław [Poland] = Uniwersytet Wrocławski [Polska] = Universität Breslau [Polen] = Université de Wrocław [Pologne]); Rachael Miller; John Protzko (UC Santa Barbara - University of California [Santa Barbara] - UC - University of California); Biljana Gjoneska (MASA - Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts [Skopje, North Macedonia]); Jeremy Miller (Willamette University); Anna Exner (RUB - Ruhr University Bochum = Ruhr-Universität Bochum [Bochum]); Flavio Azevedo (Universiteit Utrecht / Utrecht University [Utrecht]); Mariola Paruzel-Czachura (University of Pennsylvania [Philadelphia], University of Silesia in Katowice); Faisal Mushtaq (University of Leeds); Catia Oliveira (Cardiff University); Jordan Wagge; Delphine de Moor (University of Exeter); Niels Mede (UZH - Universität Zürich [Zürich] = University of Zurich); Drew Altschul (Newcastle University [Newcastle]); Yuri Pavlov (Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen = University of Tübingen); Yashvin Seetahul (Universität Innsbruck [Innsbruck] = University of Innsbruck); Leanne Boucher (NSU - Nova Southeastern University); Kimberly Doell (Universität Wien = University of Vienna); Ingmar Visser (UvA - Universiteit van Amsterdam = University of Amsterdam); Mahmoud Medhat Elsherif (University of Birmingham [Birmingham], University of Leicester); Ekaterina Pronizius (Universität Wien = University of Vienna) |
| Abstract: | The replication crisis in psychology and related sciences contributed to the adoption of large-scale research initiatives known as Big Team Science (BTS). BTS has made significant advances in addressing issues of replication, statistical power, and diversity through the use of larger samples and more representative cross-cultural data. However, while these collaborations hold great potential, they also introduce unique challenges related to their scale. Drawing on experiences from successful BTS projects, we identified and outlined key strategies for overcoming diversity, volunteering, and capacity challenges. We emphasize the need for the implementation of strong organizational practices and the distribution of responsibility to prevent common pitfalls. Ultimately, we call for reflection on the strengths and limitations of BTS to enhance the quality, generalizability, and impact of research across disciplines. This work complements existing BTS guides by offering experientially-grounded, discipline-specific strategies and addressing underexplored logistical, ethical, and epistemological challenges in large scale collaborations. |
| Keywords: | cognitive science, Big Team Science, BTS, project management, manylabs, mega-studies, meta-science, methodology, multilabs, practice of science, project manager, psychology |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05312100 |
| By: | Benkert, Jean-Michel; Letina, Igor |
| Abstract: | We provide a model of investment in innovation that is dynamic, features multiple heterogeneous research projects of which only one potentially leads to success, and in each period, the researcher chooses the set of projects to invest in. We show that if a search for innovation starts, it optimally does not end until the innovation is found—which will be never with a strictly positive probability. |
| Keywords: | Innovation |
| JEL: | D83 O31 |
| Date: | 2024–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:19732 |
| By: | Daniel Heyen; Frederik Holtel |
| Abstract: | Carbon-crediting methodologies determine how imperfect monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) evidence is translated into issued credits. When project developers can influence measured outcomes, greater reliance on project-specific data improves targeting but also strengthens incentives to manipulate the signal. We develop a model in which a crediting authority commits to a crediting rule while anticipating the project developer's response. The framework distinguishes statistical accuracy from gaming robustness. The optimal rule generally attenuates the MRV signal: greater accuracy and robustness justify stronger reliance on project-specific evidence, whereas higher credit prices and greater heterogeneity in gaming ability call for a flatter rule. Even when manipulation becomes prohibitively difficult, measurement noise alone implies attenuation. We also characterize how market and project conditions affect the relative value of improving accuracy versus robustness. An illustration using project-level data on cookstove carbon credits shows how independent reassessments can inform the framework and highlights the data requirements for empirical implementation. |
| Keywords: | carbon crediting, carbon offsets, monitoring reporting and verification, strategic manipulation, crediting-rule design, gaming robustness |
| JEL: | Q54 Q58 D82 L51 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12872 |