Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Engineering Management

ISSN 2095-7513

ISSN 2096-0255(Online)

CN 10-1205/N

Postal Subscription Code 80-905

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Eng    2023, Vol. 10 Issue (3) : 439-454    https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-022-0211-7
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Organizational evolution of project management teams over the whole lifecycle of megaprojects: Case study of the Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge
Zeyu WANG1, Huan LAN1, Minggong ZHANG2, Weirui XUE1(), Xiaolong XUE1
1. School of Management, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China
2. Department of Operation and Development, Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge Authority, Zhuhai 519060, China
 Download: PDF(1099 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Project management teams are critical in the implementation of megaprojects, but their evolution throughout the project lifecycle has not been clearly explained. This paper explores the organizational evolution of megaproject management teams through a longitudinal retrospective case study of the Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge (HZMB) project. The organizational evolution is examined in terms of management objectives, management content, and organizational structure. The organizational evolution of the HZMB project management team exhibits stage differentiation with the coexistence of turbulence and stability. Changes in the external environment are the driving force for organizational evolution, whereas a flexible organizational strategy is critical in promoting this evolution. Basing on the HZMB case study, this paper summarizes six critical measures that facilitate the organizational evolution of megaproject management teams. Our findings add value to megaproject management theory and provide a better understanding of the dynamics and complexity of megaproject organizational management.
Keywords megaproject      organizational evolution      whole lifecycle management      project management team     
Corresponding Author(s): Weirui XUE   
About author:

* These authors contributed equally to this work.
Just Accepted Date: 07 December 2022   Online First Date: 01 March 2023    Issue Date: 29 August 2023
 Cite this article:   
Zeyu WANG,Huan LAN,Minggong ZHANG, et al. Organizational evolution of project management teams over the whole lifecycle of megaprojects: Case study of the Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge[J]. Front. Eng, 2023, 10(3): 439-454.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.1007/s42524-022-0211-7
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2023/V10/I3/439
SourceNumbers
Literature (document) analysis
Decision-making stage document4 volumes
Implementation stage (design and construction) document10 volumes
Operation stage document2 volumes
Related books5 books
Semi-structured interviews15 people
Non-participatory observation (field study)95 days
Tab.1  Summary of data sources
No.PositionsWork experience in HZMB
1Department Director13 years
2Chief Engineer13 years
3Department Director11 years
4Department Director11 years
5Department Assistant Director9 years
6Safety Supervisor9 years
7Structural Engineer8 years
8Procurement Supervisor8 years
9Civil Engineer6 years
10Commercial Supervisor5 years
11Operation Supervisor5 years
12Maintenance Supervisor5 years
13Cost Engineer5 years
14Legal Affair Supervisor5 years
15Sustainability Supervisor5 years
Tab.2  Detailed information of interviewees
StageDurationMajor work
Decision-making stageAugust 5, 2003 – October 28, 2009Project approval
Implementation stageOctober 28, 2009 – October 24, 2018Project design, construction, and operation preparation
Operation stageOctober 24, 2018 – NowProject trial operation and formal operation
Tab.3  Stage information of HZMB
StageStrategic vision
Decision-making stageTo build an economic, cultural, and psychological bridge for Lingding channel of “one country, two systems, three places”, which will make Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao a world-class regional center
Implementation stageTo build a world-class cross-sea passageway, provide quality services for users, and become a landmark building
Operation stageTo provide customers with quality services, operate a world-class brand, and create social and economic value
Tab.4  Strategic visions of HZMB at different stages
Management objectiveDecision-making stageImplementation stage (design and construction)Operation stage
Quality·Feasibility study quality·Project evaluation and decision quality·Project planning quality·Data management quality·Organization coordination quality·Exploration quality·Design quality·Bidding quality·Procurement quality·Civil construction quality·Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) installation quality·Contract management quality·Data management quality·Organization coordination quality·Operation planning quality·Operation bidding quality·Operation emergency planning quality·Operation planning quality·Bidding quality·Civil maintenance quality·MEP maintenance quality·Service quality·Emergency planning quality·Research quality·Contract management quality·Data management quality·Organization coordination quality
Schedule·Feasibility study schedule·Evaluation and decision schedule·Design schedule·Construction schedule·Construction–operation transition schedule·Construction–operation transition schedule
Cost·Feasibility study cost·Financing cost·Management cost·Procurement cost·Construction cost·Management cost·Ecological compensation cost·Operation cost·Operation income·Social benefit·Ecological compensation cost
SafetyN/A·Construction safety·Aircraft route safety·Ship channel safety·Operation safety·Aircraft route safety·Ship channel safety·Structure safety·Political (Legal) security
Environmental protectionN/A·Construction physical pollution control·Construction noise control·Marine life protection·Operation waste management·Marine life protection
Tab.5  Management objectives of HZMB project team at different stages
StageManagement content
Decision-making stageTechnical feasibility study and coordination among the three governments on key issues
Implementation stageManagement of the project construction and the preparation and connection before the project is put into operation
Operation stageFinishing off project construction activities and project operation and development
Tab.6  Management content of HZMB project management team at different stages
Fig.1  Organizational structure of the HZMB project management team at different project stages.
Fig.2  Organizational evolution characteristics of the HZMB project management team at different stages.
Fig.3  Unification of turbulence and stability in the organizational evolution of the HZMB project management team.
Fig.4  Organizational evolution mechanism of the HZMB project management team.
Fig.5  Organizational flexibility of the HZMB project management team.
Organization typeOrganization nameHolding departmentMain workManagement system
Inter-departmental collaborative organizationsQuality Management CommitteeEngineering Management Department, Traffic Engineering Department, Chief Engineering OfficeQuality managementQuality Management Outline for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Management CommitteeSafety and Environmental Protection DepartmentHSE management system developmentHSE Management Outline and Control Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Informatization Leading GroupTraffic Engineering DepartmentIntegrated management information system developmentInformation System Management Outline for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB; Measures for the Implementation, Operation, and Maintenance of the Integrated Management Information System for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Credit Evaluation Leading GroupPlanning and Contracts DepartmentCredit evaluation of contractorsContractors’ Credit Evaluation Management Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Tendering and Bidding Work Leading GroupPlanning and Contracts DepartmentBidding managementTendering and Bidding Management Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Completion Acceptance CommitteeEngineering Management DepartmentCompletion acceptanceQuality Acceptance Management Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Operation Management Preparation Working GroupOperation Management DepartmentOperation preparation managementOperation Management Outline for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Temporary dedicated organizationsChinese White Dolphin Conservation Special Working GroupSafety and Environmental Protection DepartmentChinese White Dolphin conservationChinese White Dolphin Protection Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Cross-boundary Traffic Policy Working GroupFinance DepartmentTraffic policy researchWorking Outline and Management Measures for Cross-border Traffic Policy Research of the HZMB
Steel Structure Procurement and Manufacturing Bidding Working GroupPlanning and Contracts DepartmentSteel structure procurementSteel Structure Procurement and Manufacturing Management Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Bridge Trial Pile Engineering Working GroupChief Engineering OfficeTrial pile engineeringBridge Trial Pile Engineering Management System for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Steel Structure Engineering Management OfficeSteel Structure Engineering Management OfficeSteel structure engineeringSteel Structure Procurement and Manufacturing Management System for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Bridge Deck Pavement Management OfficeBridge Deck Pavement Management OfficeBridge road pavementBridge Deck Pavement Management System for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Archives Management Working GroupGeneral Affairs DivisionArchives managementArchives Management Measures for the Main Construction Project of the HZMB
Tab.7  Temporary organizations of the HZMB project management team
1 G Abatecola, (2014). Research in organizational evolution: What comes next?. European Management Journal, 32( 3): 434–443
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.07.008
2 K AlexanderI Price (2012). Managing Organizational Ecologies: Space, Management and Organizations. New York, NY: Routledge
3 R Andrews, (2010). Organizational social capital, structure and performance. Human Relations, 63( 5): 583–608
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709342931
4 M Bosch-Rekveldt, Y Jongkind, H Mooi, H Bakker, A Verbraeck, (2011). Grasping project complexity in large engineering projects: The TOE (Technical, Organizational and Environmental) framework. International Journal of Project Management, 29( 6): 728–739
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.07.008
5 N Brookes, D Sage, A Dainty, G Locatelli, J Whyte, (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
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.05.007
6 R J Chapman, (2016). A framework for examining the dimensions and characteristics of complexity inherent within rail megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, 34( 6): 937–956
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.05.001
7 W M Cohen, D A Levinthal, (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35( 1): 128–152
https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
8 E Daniel, P A Daniel, (2019). Megaprojects as complex adaptive systems: The Hinkley point C case. International Journal of Project Management, 37( 8): 1017–1033
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.05.001
9 K Davis, (2016). A method to measure success dimensions relating to individual stakeholder groups. International Journal of Project Management, 34( 3): 480–493
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.12.009
10 J Denicol, A Davies, I Krystallis, (2020). What are the causes and cures of poor megaproject performance? A systematic literature review and research agenda. Project Management Journal, 51( 3): 328–345
https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819896113
11 F Eren, (2019). Top government hands-on megaproject management: The case of Istanbul’s grand airport. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 12( 3): 666–693
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-02-2018-0020
12 B Flyvbjerg, (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12( 2): 219–245
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
13 B (2011) Flyvbjerg. Over budget, over time, over and over again: Managing major projects. In: Morris P W G, Pinto J, Söderlund J, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Project Management. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 321–344
14 B Flyvbjerg, (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project Management Journal, 45( 2): 6–19
https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21409
15 W Gao, Q Su, J Zhang, H Xie, F Wen, F Li, J Liu, (2020). Steel bridge construction of Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge. International Journal of Steel Structures, 20( 5): 1498–1508
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-020-00383-9
16 U C Gatti, G C Migliaccio, L Laird, (2014). Design management in design-build megaprojects: SR 99 Bored Tunnel case study. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 19( 1): 148–158
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000182
17 N Gil, J K Pinto, (2018). Polycentric organizing and performance: A contingency model and evidence from megaproject planning in the UK. Research Policy, 47( 4): 717–734
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.02.001
18 Q He, J Xu, T Wang, A P C Chan, (2021). Identifying the driving factors of successful megaproject construction management: Findings from three Chinese cases. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 8( 1): 5–16
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-019-0058-8
19 G Hodgson, (2013). Understanding organizational evolution: Toward a research agenda using Generalized Darwinism. Organization Studies, 34( 7): 973–992
https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613485855
20 Y Hu, A P C Chan, Y Le, (2015). Understanding the determinants of program organization for construction megaproject success: Case study of the Shanghai Expo construction. Journal of Management Engineering, 31( 5): 05014019
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000310
21 G Jia, Y Chen, X Xue, J Chen, J Cao, K Tang, (2011). Program management organization maturity integrated model for mega construction programs in China. International Journal of Project Management, 29( 7): 834–845
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.03.003
22 I Kardes, A Ozturk, S T Cavusgil, E Cavusgil, (2013). Managing global megaprojects: Complexity and risk management. International Business Review, 22( 6): 905–917
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.003
23 E Kian Manesh Rad, M Sun, F Bosche, (2017). Complexity for megaprojects in the energy sector. Journal of Management Engineering, 33( 4): 04017009
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000517
24 S W J Kozlowski, D R Ilgen, (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7( 3): 77–124
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
25 M Laursen, (2018). Project networks as constellations for value creation. Project Management Journal, 49( 2): 56–70
https://doi.org/10.1177/875697281804900204
26 J Lehtinen, A Peltokorpi, K Artto, (2019). Megaprojects as organizational platforms and technology platforms for value creation. International Journal of Project Management, 37( 1): 43–58
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.10.001
27 A Lewis, J Clark, (2020). Dreams within a dream: Multiple visions and organizational structure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41( 1): 50–76
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2419
28 Y Li, Y Lu, L Ma, Y H Kwak, (2018). Evolutionary governance for Mega-Event Projects (MEPs): A case study of the World Expo 2010 in China. Project Management Journal, 49( 1): 57–78
https://doi.org/10.1177/875697281804900105
29 H Lin, Y Sui, H Ma, L Wang, S Zeng, (2018). CEO narcissism, public concern, and megaproject social responsibility: Moderated mediating examination. Journal of Management Engineering, 34( 4): 04018018
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000629
30 Y Lu, Y Li, D Pang, Y Zhang, (2015a). Organizational network evolution and governance strategies in megaprojects. Construction Economics and Building, 15( 3): 19–33
https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v15i3.4609
31 Y Lu, L Luo, H Wang, Y Le, Q Shi, (2015b). Measurement model of project complexity for large-scale projects from task and organization perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 33( 3): 610–622
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.12.005
32 H Ma, S Zeng, H Lin, H Chen, J Shi, (2017). The societal governance of megaproject social responsibility. International Journal of Project Management, 35( 7): 1365–1377
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.012
33 P W G Morris (2011). A brief history of project management. In: Morris P W G, Pinto J, Söderlund J, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Project Management. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 15–36
34 B Pauget, A Wald, (2013). Relational competence in complex temporary organizations: The case of a French hospital construction project network. International Journal of Project Management, 31( 2): 200–211
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.07.001
35 H Priemus, (2010). Mega-projects: Dealing with pitfalls. European Planning Studies, 18( 7): 1023–1039
https://doi.org/10.1080/09654311003744159
36 Y Qiu, H Chen, Z Sheng, S Cheng, (2019). Governance of institutional complexity in megaproject organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 37( 3): 425–443
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.02.001
37 S P RobbinsT A Judge (2017). Essentials of Organizational Behavior. 14th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson
38 I Ruuska, T Ahola, K Artto, G Locatelli, M Mancini, (2011). A new governance approach for multi-firm projects: Lessons from Olkiluoto 3 and Flamanville 3 nuclear power plant projects. International Journal of Project Management, 29( 6): 647–660
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.10.001
39 A Shenhar, V Holzmann, (2017). The three secrets of megaproject success: Clear strategic vision, total alignment, and adapting to complexity. Project Management Journal, 48( 6): 29–46
https://doi.org/10.1177/875697281704800604
40 R E Stake (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
41 A StraussJ M Corbin (1997). Grounded Theory in Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
42 J Sun, P Zhang, (2011). Owner organization design for mega industrial construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 29( 7): 828–833
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.04.005
43 G Wang, P Wu, X Wu, H Zhang, Q Guo, Y Cai, (2020). Mapping global research on sustainability of megaproject management: A scientometric review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259: 120831
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120831
44 Y Wu, Y Huang, S Zhang, Y Zhang, (2014). Quality management evaluation based on self-control and cosupervision mechanism in PIP. Journal of Management Engineering, 30( 2): 180–184
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000193
45 J XueG Q ShenX DengA J OgungbileX Chu (2022). Evolution modeling of stakeholder performance on relationship management in the dynamic and complex environments of megaprojects. Engineering, Construction, and Architectural Management, in press, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-06-2021-0504
46 D Yang, Q He, Q Cui, S C Hsu, (2018). Organizational citizenship behavior in construction megaprojects. Journal of Management Engineering, 34( 4): 04018017
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000614
47 R K Yin (2013). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
48 S X Zeng, H Y Ma, H Lin, R C Zeng, V W Y Tam, (2015). Social responsibility of major infrastructure projects in China. International Journal of Project Management, 33( 3): 537–548
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.007
49 L Zhai, Y Xin, C Cheng, (2009). Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder’s perspective: Case study of mega-project management. Project Management Journal, 40( 1): 99–109
https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.20099
50 X Zheng, Y Lu, Y Le, Y Li, J Fang, (2018). Formation of interorganizational relational behavior in megaprojects: Perspective of the extended theory of planned behavior. Journal of Management Engineering, 34( 1): 04017052
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000560
51 H Zhou, H Wang, W Zeng, (2018). Smart construction site in mega construction projects: A case study on island tunneling project of Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 5( 1): 78–87
https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2018075
52 Z Zhou, C Mi, (2017). Social responsibility research within the context of megaproject management: Trends, gaps and opportunities. International Journal of Project Management, 35( 7): 1378–1390
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.02.017
53 Y Zhu, Q Shi, Q Li, Z Yin, (2018). Decision-making governance for the Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge in China. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 5: 30–39
https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2018087
[1] Qinghua HE, Junyan XU, Ting WANG, Albert P. C. CHAN. Identifying the driving factors of successful megaproject construction management: Findings from three Chinese cases[J]. Front. Eng, 2021, 8(1): 5-16.
[2] Yan ZHANG, His-Hsien WEI, Dong ZHAO, Yilong HAN, Jiayu CHEN. Understanding innovation diffusion and adoption strategies in megaproject networks through a fuzzy system dynamic model[J]. Front. Eng, 2021, 8(1): 32-47.
[3] Oluwole Alfred OLATUNJI. Causations of failure in megaprojects: A case study of the Ajaokuta Steel Plant project[J]. Front. Eng, 2018, 5(3): 334-346.
[4] Qing-hua He,De-lei Yang,Yong-kui Li,Lan Luo. Research on Multidimensional Connotations of Megaproject Construction Organization Citizenship Behavior[J]. Front. Eng, 2015, 2(2): 148-153.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed