Umeå University's logo

The aim of this essay is to conceptualize and discuss the phenomenon of organizational deprojectification, with the aim of exploring the drivers and consequences thereof. The discussion begins with an overview of the development of the concept of projectification, providing the necessary background to examine existing research on organizational deprojectification. Employing the lens of paradox theory, the authors analyze paradoxes influencing the deprojectification process. Subsequently, the article presents a conceptual process model that encapsulates these paradoxes, accompanied by a discussion of the implications for organizations. The findings offer a deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with deprojectification and contribute to the broader discourse on projectification in contemporary environments.

With the premise that ontological assumptions about Homo academicus and Homo academicus dux (the academic leader) must include knowledge and analysis of the organisational context where they act, this chapter sets out to challenge some common (and we argue incorrect) assumptions in contemporary management literature regarding how power is distributed, the role of dependencies among units and practices, and how a sense of belonging is formed. Three (alternative) conditions are introduced—reversed hierarchy, lateral independence, and community-based belonging—upon which academic practice and leadership implications are discussed. The alternative conditions thus explain why and how Homo academicus and Homo academicus dux acts the way (s)he acts, which consequently makes out the contours of a new academic rationality.

Purpose: Based on the well-known risks associated with deviating from established routines in primary healthcare and the positive consequences of upholding them, the purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of the role of meaningfulness in the enactment of organizational routines.

Design/methodology/approach: The study is based on 24 semi-structured interviews with three different professional categories in primary healthcare in Sweden. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis on a latent level, combined with a two-factor model as sensitizing concepts.

Findings: Differences are identified between factors that reduce meaninglessness (called “sufficiency factors”) and those that enable meaningfulness (called “meaningfulness factors”). Nine sufficiency factors and six meaningfulness factors explain what makes organizational routines perceived as meaningful by the different professional groups. A two-factor matrix is developed that highlights the intricate challenges associated with routine enactment based on these factors.

Originality/value: The study is unique in that it is the first to integrate research on organizational routines and meaningfulness. However, understanding meaningful organizational routines is not only essential because it is an overlooked area in both of these two streams of research but also because of its clear, practical relevance in the primary healthcare setting.

This Special Issue marks the 30th anniversary of the influential 1995 Special Issue on Temporary Organizations in the Scandinavian Journal of Management, which redefined projects as time-bound, socially embedded organizations. That issue initiated a “soul-searching” journey, sparking a vibrant academic field. Today, the field offers nuanced insights into temporary organizing, gaining broader recognition in management and organization studies. This anniversary prompts renewed soul-searching: Do the original ideas still resonate? How should the field evolve amid contemporary challenges? What responsibilities do scholars bear? We close by reflecting on creating and nurturing the soul of an academic field, and suggest future paths for soulful and responsible scholarship in temporary organizations.

This paper investigates the challenges of disseminating results from a Strategic Innovation Programme (SIP) in the Swedish built environment sector. The study takes on a technological niche perspective and combines document analysis, semi-structured interviews, and focus group interviews to increase the understanding of what might hamper sector-wide dissemination of results from SIPs. Analyzing the dissemination practices from a technological niche perspective, it is shown how the dissemination of results is dependent on two preconditions (ambition and capacity) and how clarity of target group(s) in combination with the alignment between RDI logic and the target group's frame of reference (which is anchored in the socio-technical regime) further inhibits or enables dissemination. It is concluded that ensuring these preconditions and strengthening the alignment is critical to improving sector-wide dissemination. However, an inherent dilemma must be dealt with in terms of not necessarily prioritizing dissemination at the expense of norm-challenging ideas. Given that the overarching goal of technological niches is to achieve socio-technical change, merely promoting incremental (norm-aligned) change – or “lame ducks”— is not enough.

In primary healthcare, various professions and roles need to collaborate to treat the constant influx of patients. Notorious problems of stress, high workload, high staff turnover, etcetera, make dealing with this collaboration even more challenging. Well-functioning organizational routines are needed to coordinate work, ensure patient safety, and the correct and equal treatment of patients. However, if the routines are perceived as meaningless, there is a high risk that professionals will deviate from them. Therefore, it is essential that the routine is perceived as meaningful to motivate all those involved to uphold the routine. Although the subjective meaningfulness of work has been extensively researched, it has yet to be connected to organizational routines. We, therefore, explore how meaningfulness can be enabled in organizational routines. Based on a thematic analysis of interviews with staff at three primary care units, six sources that make routines perceived as meaningful were identified. Also, we discuss two types of organizational practices that can foster meaningfulness in routines. Our findings have significant implications for healthcare organizations and are relevant for organizations in other contexts where different professional groups collaborate.

For construction firms to prosper, digital ambidexterity in terms of the organisational capability to both exploit existing digital technologies and explore new ones is found critical. In this regard, research suggests that construction firms must have the ability to employ various mechanisms to achieve digital ambidexterity. However, there is a limited understanding of whether mechanisms and not just their elements can be combined to achieve digital ambidexterity. Therefore, this paper explores this gap with the purpose of investigating how various digital ambidexterity mechanisms coexist and are integrated. Using a qualitative research methodology, this study draws on insights from 36 semi-structured interviews conducted in two large construction projects, complemented by five days of on-site observations and secondary data. The material is analyzed using a systematic grounded theory-inspired approach. In the results, the two cases are juxtaposed, and the unfoldment of the mechanism is outlined over time. It is observed how the main contractor's exploitation efforts in utilizing digital technologies can lead to an exploration effort for subcontractors, which challenges the common assumptions about ambidexterity where exploration is succeeded by exploitation. Additionally, it is shown that the combination of digital ambidexterity mechanisms could vary from parallel existence to integration, with the potential for synergy. In conclusion, this research highlights the multifaceted nature of digital ambidexterity in construction projects and broadens the understanding of how digital ambidexterity unfolds in an inter-organisational setting. Through that, the finding provides construction project actors with valuable insights for improved digital strategy formulation.

In his keynote speech at the 2023 ARCOM conference, Professor Andy Dainty encouraged Construction Management (CM) scholars “to do things differently”. He argued that for the field to uphold its legitimacy and relevance, scholars must better engage in a broader set of theoretically informed debates around which accumulations of knowledge form. How this is to be done, he did not address. Based on a phenomenology-inspired analysis and drawing on the ideas of Community of Practice, we reflect on what needs to be done to follow his advice. We introduce and discuss three scholarly orientations - community natives, expatriates, and itinerants. To do things differently, we argue that more CM scholars must act as community itinerates or expatriates and, thus, instead of only “helping the industry”, explore the relative peculiarities of AEC and understand how these can be used to challenge taken-for-granted assumptions beyond the CM filed. In doing so, scholars must also develop “discursive competence” and challenge their identity so that they primarily identify with being academics rather than being part of and serving the industry.