The competing public values of quality, responsibility, and responsiveness play a leading role. In the Dutch case, quality concerns the realization of public infrastructure to improve the Dutch economy or mobility objectives, in cases of specific projects. The classic iron triangle of project values, aimed at the realization of a project by balancing time, budget, scope, and quality strongly relates to the perception of projects as a success or failure. Responsibility and responsiveness are procedural public values. Responsibility concerns the extent to which both public and private partners comply with the contractual agreements and output specifications agreed at the start of the PPP project. Responsiveness implies the ability of the partners to influence and adjust contractual agreements and output specifications before and after contract closure, to deal with unexpected developments and new insights. The chapter discusses the emergence of DBFM (design, build, finance, maintain) contracts in Dutch road and water infrastructure megaprojects and analyses how public values transpired in a less and a more successful megaproject. The second case was less successful due to the emphasis on the value of responsibility. Attempts to keep parties to the agreed strict division of responsibilities did not resolve conflicts between the public and private partners. The first project focused on relational contracting and building a resilient partnership to find the right balance between responsibility and responsiveness. Managing competing public values entails coping strategies that overcome zero sum-situations and that realize synergies, not building firewalls but enhancing responsiveness and capacity to learn and adapt.@en

Recently, scholars have called for a focus on subjective aspects of risk management as a suitable lens for understanding how it functions. In line with this lens, this study focuses on project actors’ viewpoints on risk management in the context of construction projects to provide novel insights in risk management. Drawing on Renn's model and following a Q methodology, we identify four risk management approaches among asset managers and project managers working at the Dutch Schiphol Airport. The action-oriented and future-oriented viewpoints are dominant, while the expert input and stakeholder-centric viewpoints are in the minority. Our findings extend the risk management debate by showing that (1) there are various approaches to risk management that have been identified independently from the formal risk management; (2) these approaches cannot be explained by a project actor's role or objective within the project; and (3) that project actors have a dominant focus on managing complexity-induced risks at the expense of managing other types of risks.

@en

Policy of Multi-Actor Systems is an introduction into the art of craft of problem exploration and problem structuring. It positions policy analysis as a scientific discipline focused on systems analysis in a multi-actor context to support better informed decision-making. The approach presented in this book is considered to be the cornerstone of the curricula of the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management of Delft University of Technology and underlies the research on (the governance of) socio-technical systems. Systems thinking applied in a multi-actor environment and its inherent multi-disciplinary character is what makes this work stand out from traditional hard- and soft systems approaches. The core of the book is dedicated to systems analysis, actor- or stakeholder-analysis and discusses methods for dealing with uncertainty. These analytical activities combined lead to a rich problem description and to plans for further research. Due to the stepwise approach this book serves as a basis for any problem analysis both for our bachelor and master students, our alumni worldwide and any interested practitioners.@en

Governing material conditions—including physical, material subjects such as machines, build constructions, construction materials, and subsoils—is a crucial challenge within projects and is underrepresented in project governance theory. To clarify the relationship between project governance and materiality, we draw on translation theory, which is essentially about the reinterpretation, appropriation, and representation of interests related to materials. This paper studies the challenges of governing the underground during the construction of the new terminal at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. The findings show that, during the project life cycle, the translation of the underground by project actors hampered the necessary relocation of utilities in this project. This eventually resulted in delays and unforeseen costs. This translation is explained by a combination of the governance of the project, strategic interactions of project actors, and the characteristics and context of the material conditions. We contribute to project governance studies by demonstrating the usefulness of translation theory to better understand the mechanisms at play in governing underrepresented material conditions in infrastructure projects.

@en

This study assesses and explains interagency collaboration performance in the Chinese public sector. Through a comparative case study, it shows that inter-organizational relation is hard to start up; conflicting policies, incompatible procedures, power disparity, low issue salience, and lack of perceived interdependence may separately and jointly affect collaboration performance. The presence of vertical meta-governance plays a critical role in turning the tide; however, its presence is tied up with other factors such as high issue salience or bottom-up appeal. In addition, the highest level of performance not only depends on vertical meta-governance but also on horizontal meta-governance.

@en

In this contribution, the introduction of contractual public-private partnerships (PPPs) in the Netherlands, more specifically the use of Design, Build, Finance, Maintenance, and Operations (DBFMO) contracts in Dutch infrastructure management, is analysed using a specific strand within the policy transfer and institutional transplantation literature: that of 'institutional bricolage'. This perspective states that policy transplants come to fit their new institutional context stepwise. This contribution reconstructs the adoption process by which the Anglo-Saxon-inspired PPP practice is incorporated into the traditional 'Rhinelandic' practice of infrastructure management in the Netherlands, identifying four waves of PPP initiatives. It concludes that these waves and the difficulties that emerge in them stem from an ongoing struggle between actor coalitions, one aiming to preserve the transplant in its original shape, and others making attempts at bricolage. Shifts in power relations explain the progress and outcomes of the process of institutional transplantation.

@en

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.

@en