The development of trust is a major challenge for the governance of public private infrastructure megaprojects. Contractual pre-arrangements should provide a blueprint for collaborative behavior and trust development but the characters of megaprojects challenge such arrangements. This longitudinal study explores practices of trust development in the collaboration of commissioner and contractor consortia in the Dutch road infrastructure megaproject ‘Schiphol, Amsterdam and Almere’ (SAA). The findings show that six different types of workshops have been used to intervene in the collaboration of project partners in order to develop trust. The study contributes to the debate on governance in megaprojects showing how governance arrangement are enacted in the daily practice in megaprojects. To buffer the potential loss of trust through conflicts, project partners negotiated for a balanced reciprocal relationship, which is the simultaneous exchange of equivalent resources without delay.

This paper studies the ways in which members of inter-organizational teams collectively make sense of unexpected events and how they decide upon engaging in action. Frequently, ambiguity dominates such change processes aimed to create common understanding. Using the notion of the duality of intrinsic and constructed ambiguity, a detailed analysis of the collective sensemaking efforts of an inter-organizational team of railway coordinators in the Operational Control Center Rail was conducted. Building on team meetings observations during the days preceding a large and potentially disruptive winter storm in December 2013, the case study describes the process of collectively making sense of the disruptiveness of the storm. The findings show that contextual and temporal factors determine whether collective sensemaking unfolds as either a shared or a negotiated process.

A parliamentary enquiry in 2002 forced Dutch construction firms to end collusive practices and build an innovative construction industry. Intervention programmes were started in the period of 2004-2012 to implement new cultural values. This paper explores which cultural interventions have been employed to stimulate innovation in the construction sector and how did they worked out in two megaprojects. The study exposes the shortcomings of the hyperculture approach to change in the construction industry as social mechanisms easily result in the replication of social structure and power relations. To prevent failure, intentions for change need to include cultural patterns at action and interaction level. In the studied cases, these levels were addresses addressed in which both commissioners and contractors discuss practices of tendering and collaboration. The findings in this study are based upon a longitudinal study of and presence in the cultural intervention programmes in the Dutch construction industry from 2006 to 2012 and the ethnographic study of the urban train and the renewal sluices megaprojects.

After a parliamentary enquiry into construction industry malpractice, changes occurred in collaborative practices between clients and contractors in megaprojects within the Dutch construction sector. The enquiry meant that both clients and contractors were forced to acknowledge illegal practices of collusion and fraud. For those engaged in public-private relationships, a process followed of attempting to change collaborative practices. Three interventions in collaborative practices are recounted: (1) organizing personal networks between clients and contractors; (2) a competitive dialogue procedure; and (3) the right of withdrawal. These three interventions helped to change first order practice, such as increasing mutual trust between client and contractor, supporting a mutual understanding of role positioning and dilemmas, and creating an understanding of the nature of the conflict but failed to change second order practices. Two contributions to the understanding of project management are provided. New empirical data are presented on the challenges that public and private partners face in their attempt to implement new collaborative practices. It is shown how power is entangled in the emerging of new collaborative practices. The findings are based on a longitudinal ethnographic study of public-private collaboration in the Dutch construction industry in the period 2006-11.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the role of intervention/oriented scientists in the process of organisation development. The paper seeks to contribute to the growing interest in design studies for organisation development and argues that a focus on reflexivity is missing in current debate. The aim of the paper to develop critical reflexiveness for organization design studies by introducing the ethnoventionist approach. Design/methodology/approach – The paper discusses the ideal forms of clinical inquiry, participative action research, ethnography, and the ethnoventionist approach. The ethnoventionist approach is described by its central aspects: a focus on reflexivity, a management (but not managerialist) orientation, commitment to obtaining a deep understanding, connecting the multi/layered context, and studying in pre/arranged longitudinal intervals. Findings – The ethnoventionist approach uses organisational ethnographies to facilitate intervention strategies intended to improve organisations. An example of such an approach in the design of new collaborative practices in the Dutch construction sector is drawn on. Practical implications – The essence of the ethnoventionist approach is to obtain a deeper understanding of organisational change. The ethnoventionist approach helps to overcome a lack of attention to management in current ethnographic bodies of knowledge and to deepen existing management approaches to change dynamics. Ethnoventionist approaches can be very useful for intervention/oriented studies of change processes which require high levels of engagement and which produce high/quality ethnographic data. Originality/value – This paper explores a new research approach that has not been discussed previously.

This paper describes the development of new forms of public-private collaboration by members of a project-based organisation as a Community of Practice (CoP) in the Dutch construction sector. Cost overruns, time delays and corruption have put pressure on the relationship between the government and the construction sector. Political and public actors are forcing the construction industry to develop new cultural practices of collaboration in public-private partnerships. The paper incorporates power relations and shows how public and private partners, together with the researchers, develop an innovative tendering process. Based upon the literature on project-based organisations functioning as CoPs, we show how temporal organisational settings can enable new forms of learning. The specific development of a CoP in the Dutch construction sector has resulted in a 3-D virtual simulation programme which can be used to experience new behaviour and to train people in new approaches.

Recent studies show that despite their growing popularity, megaprojects - large-scale, complex projects delivered through various partnerships between public and private organisations - often fail to meet costs estimations, time schedules and project outcomes and are motivated by vested interests which operate against the public interest. This paper presents a more benign and theoretically-grounded view on what goes wrong by comparing the project designs, daily practices, project cultures and management approaches of two recent megaprojects in The Netherlands and Australia, showing how these projects made sense of uncertainty, ambiguity and risk. We conclude that project design and project cultures play a role in determining how managers and partners cooperate to achieve project objectives to a greater or lesser extent.