Introducing an internationally Accepted Project Management Tool into Russian Aviation: Translation Processes for Responsibility Assignment at Pulkovo Airport

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Introducing an internationally Accepted Project Management Tool into Russian Aviation: Translation Processes for Responsibility Assignment at Pulkovo Airport

Introduction

1.1 The new institutional theory in organizational analysis

airport management institutional

New institutional theory forms the base for a large number of current researches in management studies, sociology, politics, and economics. It received increasing attention in recent years (Kraatz, Phillips, & Tracey, 2016), and is discussed widely across international management conferences.

According to Fernandez-Alles and Valle-Cabrera (2006) the new institutional theory based on the conception that an organization is rewarded by legitimacy and resources. It means that organizations introduce contextual values, ceremonies and symbols into their strategies, practices and structures. That causes a passive change of an organization due to coercive and normative pressers, but it may help to get the social support of stakeholders. All this leads to the circulation of values and beliefs, strategies and practices among companies and this process makes organizations similar to each other.

This research is based on the new institutional theory firstly developed in the works of Meyer and Rowan (1977), DiMaggio and Powell (1983). At first, this theory focused on individual organizations complying with the rules and belief system in the organizational field, objective reality of the environment imposed on the activities of organizations, to make outcomes more effective. During the period from the 1980s to the 1990s, Greenwood, Oliver, Suddaby and Sahlin (2008) found that those organizations that adopting some new structures for legitimization were influenced by social values. Since the 1990s, the new institutional theory has become a popular trend in contemporary organization and management theory (Mohamed, 2017). The new institutional theory as a response to economic pressures for resource and social pressures Suddaby, Seidl and Lк (2013) has gained popularity because of its ability to explain organizational behavior that defies rational economic explanations.

In contrast to the “old” institutional theory, which focuses on individualism, the new institutional theory focuses on the external causes (Powell & Bromley, 2015). Some researchers are still discussing that internal organizational changes are the result of external causes; therefore, to carry out internal changes successfully is quite a complicated process (Kraatz, Phillips, & Tracey, 2016). According to Mohamed (2017) one of the main contributions of the new institutional theory is introducing a strong cultural cognitive perspective.

Change management topics became a main driver for the development (Fernandez-Alles & Valle-Cabrera, 2006) of new institutional theory. The “old” institutional theory had a dispute as this theory did not cover the circulation topic; this theory emphases inertia and perseverance instead of the change and adaptation process (Senge, 2013). A number of scientists criticized the institutional theory as it involved the stability inherent of organizations rather than attracted the attention to the managerial role (Fernandez-Alles & Valle-Cabrera, 2006). Thus, organizational passivity and predetermined outcome of organizational context discussed by the “old” institutional theory is contradicted by contemporary researches that claim that the world is constantly changing, and organizations have to adjust their structures and practices to new conditions. Scandinavian scholars claim that institutionalized practices such as imitation, translation and editing are carried out around the world in accordance with local specifics (Powell & Bromley, 2015).

Moreover, the research carried out by Mohamed (2017) proved that some scientists in their works criticized the new institutional theory since the institutionalization process was ignored: this theory only focused on effects and on macro-levels. In spite of their opinions, he considered that the new institutional theory should focus more on micro-level antecedents of change.

Some researchers suggest that new institutional theory forms an important part of contemporary studies in strategic management, in particular, with the strategy-as-practice approach. It necessary to note that the new institutional theory based on “old” institutionalism has a rich history while the strategy-as-practice approach has recently appeared; nevertheless, they have something in common. Both of them are the result of the reaction to the assumption of economic rationality: organizations respond to pressure in their social and symbolic environment rather than simply to economic pressure (Meyer & Rowan, 1977). In the same way, the strategy-as-practice approach was developed as a response to economic views on strategic planning; this approach is compatible with new institutionalism (Suddaby, Seidl, & Lк, 2013)

Although, new institutional theory had a change management theory as the main driver (Fernandez-Alles & Valle-Cabrera, 2006) and Hasselbladh and Kallinikos (2000) argued that the new institutional theory provided not only the stability in the organizational field but also organizational strategies in order to be competitive in the contemporary dynamic environment. Therefore, Fernandez-Alles and Valle-Cabrera (2006) deduced that the ideas of changes and circulating processes (imitation, translation, and editing) were the result of the institutional theory. In addition, Uhlenbruck, Meyer and Hitt (2003) suggested that some researches revealed the importance of organizational change and resource assignment in organizations in order to compete effectively on local and foreign markets.

Despite the fact that contemporary studies drawing on new institutional theory focus on the source of organizational changes, specifics of influenced factors, and circulation processes of the changes some issues have not been covered yet. It is essential to deal with strategic and institutional theories to explain changes by means of strategic actions and organizational context. The new institutional theory insights combined with the strategic management theory have provoked new research lines. Current researchers are interested in the way how top managers organize and contribute to organizational life through social symbolic work that includes identity in an organization, technologies, values, strategies, and so on (Lawrence & Phillips, Publication expected June 2019).

According to Suddaby, Seidl and Lк (2013) the new institutional theory was criticized due to the lack of a strategic choice. Nevertheless, they claimed that the new institutional theory applied concepts of rational myths, diffusion (imitation, translation, and editing), legitimacy and isomorphism (similarity) to explain institutional changes. Askeland (2017) underlined that the most important for the actors of changes to choose and formulate ideas that circulating (imitating, translating and editing) in organizations. The following section describes this current stream of theory development more closely.

1.2 Translation approach

Within the new institutional theory, it has recently been researched how organizations can implement changes in practice. Any ideas and models may become popular as a result of their successful implementation in different organizations. The majority of organizations have a desire to succeed and provide legitimacy; therefore, they try to use ideas that lead to achieving goals (Fredriksson, Pallas, & Wehmeier, 2013). It is important to take into consideration that each organization is unique and has a unique context and strategy. An additional reason for the implementation of new ideas, practices and strategies within organizations may result in losing legitimacy and unique values, increasing external pressures, and so on. Thus, the internal and external issues may be solved by introducing efficient ideas, practices, and strategies legitimately.

Greenwood, Oliver, Suddaby and Sahlin (2008) summarized three approaches from the new institutional theory treating the implementation of changes within companies: imitation, translation and editing. According to studies by Posen, Lee and Yi (2013), insights from the imitation approach can support companies to improve change implementation and thus their performance. The power of the imitation strategy lies in its reflection of the limited ability to replicate the attributes of other companies accurately. Some studies show that the imitation strategy could have an adaptive role, which means that the strategy uses similar practices.

The translation approach tries to understand how organizations can implement tools within change management successfully from one context into another. According to works of Fredriksson, Pallas and Wehmeier (2013), Frandsen and Johansen (2013), the translation approach based on sociological researches (Bergstrцm & Diedrich, 2011) and actor-network approaches (Alcouffe, Berland, & Levant, 2008). It was developed in the works of Callon (1984) and Latour (2005), they introduced a new meaning of the word “translation”; they understand under this notion a complicated process of adaptation. The pioneers of the translation approach were Scandinavian researchers (Suarez & Bromley, 2015). They were interested in circulating management ideas that were translated into objects (models, tools, presentations, etc.) in different contexts (Lawrence & Phillips, Publication expected June 2019). Having implemented the translation approach, Japanese researchers argue that the given approach helps to create innovative strategies instead of duplicating existing ones. It means that while acquiring some ideas they cannot remain the same without changes and they are always modified in accordance with required needs. Moreover, any copied practices, structures and ideas adopted from other countries or companies always need to be adjusted to the particular context (Suarez & Bromley, 2015). The translation approach helps to bring and transform strategies, processes, organizational structures and ideas in accordance with the particular context (Suarez & Bromley, 2015). Similarly, recent research by Logue, Jarvis, Clegg, & Hermens (2015) argues that any idea cannot be duplicated from one context to another without adaptations. Moreover, transferring ideas from one sphere into another one needs reshaping these ideas in order to satisfy requirements of existing circulated ideas in an organization (Lawrence & Phillips, Constructing organizational life: How social-symbolic work shapes selves, organizations, and institutions, Publication expected June 2019). While translating ideas, actors review ideas to make them legitimate and reliable.

The editing approach is based on the translation approach; this approach may bring and transform any idea in accordance with the particular context. However, the main difference between them is that the editing approach may not only adapt to the idea but also change the content of the idea.

Considering all mentioned above, it may be concluded that while choosing the most suitable approach to implement necessary ideas and models, several factors should be taken into account. The chosen approach should not replicate ideas and models of other companies accurately and change the content of ideas and models. Thus, the translation approach requires all these demands and may be considered as the most suitable strategy while implementing necessary ideas and models and adapting them to the context of an organization.

The translation approach pays special attention to the active role of actors who participate in the creation, dissemination and implementation of ideas and models within a particular context (Fredriksson, Pallas, & Wehmeier, 2013). These actors are the main sources of some organizational change; therefore, these entities are the initiators of the introduction of new ideas and models. Organization members, policy makers, professional bodies, consultants, scientists, media and other actors of the organization adapt ideas and models to the particular conditions of organizations. If there appear any obstacles while implementing ideas and models, actors come up with solutions.

Kirkpatrick, Bullinger, Lega and Dent (2013) suggested that despite some agreement between Scandinavian and North American institutionalism in the way how actors modify spreading organizational templates, there is a disagreement in what extent actors are involved in this process. Some actors are not consciously modifying or editing practices. Thus, actors take part in a specific situation choosing and changing new templates (ideas and models) in accordance with the history of their locality, traditions, and institutions. It leads to appear some uncertainty as it is not clear how an identical idea can look in a new context.

Implementing ideas or models may be a response on the internal or external issues of an organization that is why any changes should satisfy organizational needs. According to Uhlenbruck, Meyer and Hitt (2003), organizations should adapt their organizational structure and processes in order to find out market opportunities and resources. Developers need to achieve strategic flexibility by using their resource in an appropriate way. Moreover, Greenwood, Oliver, Suddaby and Sahlin (2008) argue that sometimes implementing some popular ideas and models may be the result of the fashion; it means there is no need for an organization to implement these new ideas and models. However, an organization should clearly understand the necessity of implementing such ideas and models that are widely spread in other organizations. Thus if new ideas and models are better than existing ones and may help to achieve legitimization such copying is useful and even necessary (Logue, Jarvis, Clegg, & Hermens, 2015).

It should be noted that bringing new ideas and models demands complying with certain terms (Logue, Jarvis, Clegg, & Hermens, 2015); therefore, a business sector and location, as well as local life standards, should be considered while translating some ideas and models.

The characteristic of the translation approach is a high degree of predictability and regularity instead of a constant search for exclusivity and originality; as the ideas and models to translate have existed already, they just should be adjusted to the context. Thus, the translation approach includes three key points: context, formulation, and logic. Due to the fact that the idea comes from a different context, it rarely completely satisfies the conditions of an organization. Therefore, while implementing this approach temporal and spatial characteristics of an idea are usually omitted or downplayed (Fredriksson, Pallas, & Wehmeier, 2013). As a result, these ideas may become generalized. Organizations use the translation approach to implement ideas, formulate their forms and content satisfying local assumptions and interests.

A lot of recent studies highlight only two main institutional contexts: the origin context and the “destination” context. It is necessary to point out that the way how to translate templates (ideas and models) used in Western Europe and the USA within the Russian context is insufficiently studied. Besides, to understand these particular local specifics and their influence on the translation approach is significant. It should be determined how actors translate global templates in a local context for an organizational change.

1.3 Project management tools

airport management institutional

According to Hornstein (2015), any changes such as translating ideas and models into an organization are the result of project implementations; therefore, the success of the project depends on its successful management. Change management and project management are mutually supportive practices. It is essential not only to apply accurately skills and knowledge but also to choose appropriate tools and methods.

Svejvig and Andersen (2015) defined project management as a discipline which helps to achieve some innovation and efficiency for a company. According to Hornstein (2015), project management is applied through project management methodologies, tools, skills, and knowledge due to the particular organizational requirements. Љpundak (2014) argued that “project management methodology is a set of methods, techniques, procedures, rules, templates, and best practices used on a project”.

Temporality is a key feature of project management. When an organization initiates projects, it considers them as temporary organizations that have to carry out the tasks of a primary organization (Svejvig & Andersen, 2015). In other words, it means that an initiated project is equal to an initiated new organization in order to complete the organizational task. According to Bakker, Boros?, Kenis and Oerlemans (2013), the temporary project requires time frames for project participants as they help to manage project tasks and processes. Beyond that, any project has its beginning and end.

The term “project management” was firstly coined in the 1950s and it was conditioned by the need in the position (Farashah, Thomas, & Blomquist, 2018) of a project manager (a person or an organization that is responsible to achieve the project goals). Initially, it was project time management that was actively being developed in project management. This is due to the fact that any project is temporary and should require limited time and meet the deadline.

During the 1960s, project management scholars took an interest in project cost management that is responsible for controlling and planning resources and they started integrating project cost management in project time management. Project management started using a network technique in order to plan, control and schedule at that time. However, project management was only applied in construction, defense, and aerospace industries.

In its turn, several researchers introduced and spread the project management techniques into other spheres. The 1970s may be called a rapid development of project management; a lot of tools and techniques were invented including responsibility assignment matrices. A number of problems and conflicts, which were provoked by projects, were to be solved by means of different approaches; for instance, adopting and investigating matrix forms. The project management created the conditions for creating new positions and companies began to adopt new professions.

Since the 1980s project management research has been developing significantly. According to Garel (2013), the history of project management research differs significantly from the history of other directions of management studies. He argued that predominantly scholars considering specific examples of management projects rarely based their work on archives and historic documents devoted to the development of project management theory. Project managers working in the condition of limited time, also rarely considered the history of project management research in detail. Thus, there are few scientific researches describing the history of project management. Nevertheless, since 1980s, research into the history of project management started developing significantly.

Between 1980 and 1990, there was an increasing interest in customers' needs, risk management, and the origin of projects. Managers started using new elements of projects (human resources planning, risks, quality, etc.) to make project management more efficient. At that time, project management was regarded as a structured discipline and the life cycle of project has become more balanced. Moreover, the development of project management methodology provoked implementing changes in project management theory at that time (Morris, 2002).

From the early 1990s till the beginning of the 2000s, the interest in the manager role was not fading. Due to the possibility to use computers in project management the work of managers has become more efficient. At that period of time, the agile project management appeared (Љpundak, 2014), and it helped to solve some problems of project management.

Currently, the interest in project management coincides with a perception that all is getting faster in business; as a result, it is essential to follow all developing market opportunities. With more organization in project form, more and more project management problems are arising. To cope with this, managers increasingly use project management tools to achieve goals and make work easier; as a result, more and more work in conducted in time-restricted projects.

Thus, any project needs its suitable tools in accordance with certain requirements and organizational context (Farashah, Thomas, & Blomquist, 2018). More and more new project management tools and methods are emerging lately. Project management theory suggests different simple and advanced project management tools (Kostalova, Tetrevova, & Svedik, 2015). Using special software, for example, helps to decrease in time. There is not a unified method for completing projects that is why it is vital to identify a suitable method.

According to Nakayama and Chen (2016), development and control of project aspects, such as resources, budget, communications, quality management, responsibility assignment, schedule of the project and so on, is often supported by so-called “project management tools”. Project management tools help to develop a concept, to plan, to implement and to evaluate (Kostalova, Tetrevova, & Svedik, 2015).

Nakayama and Chen (2016) argued that several project management tools, which manage project resources, change control process, risks, and project planning, have the most crucial impact on project success. Project managers should choose the most suitable tools in order to conduct projects effectively (Љpundak, 2014).

Project management tools (Kostalova, Tetrevova, & Svedik, 2015) may be divided into several groups in accordance with a particular task, for example:

- to develop concept: CBA (Cost Benefit Analysis), Financial Analysis and Evaluation of Project;

- to plan: BRM (Benefits Realization Management), PBS (Product Breakdown Structure), APF (Adaptive Project Framework), CPM (Critical Path Method), MPM (Metra Potential Method), XPM (Extreme Project Management), CPM/COST (Critical Path Method/Cost), PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique), GERT (Graphical Evaluation and Review Technique), Gantt Chart, Critical Chain Method, Responsibility Assignment Matrix, Qualitative and Quantitative Risk Analysis;

- to implement: EVM (Earned Value Management);

- to evaluate: McKinsey model of 7S.

It is a list of the most commonly used project management tools. Each of them has been developed to carry out a particular task. The adequate usage of project management tools is considered to improve project management performance (Nakayama & Chen, 2016). Using project management tools help to ensure the success of the project.

One important problem of project management can be unclear responsibility distribution. It means that employees are not always aware of what they are responsible for. According to recent research by Andronic and Dumitraєcu (2018), if employees do not interfere into the work of others and assume responsibility for both success and failure, organizations with well-established responsibilities within their respective projects will develop faster and maintain an organizational advantage within the context of severe market competition.

The Responsibility Assignment Matrix (the RACI matrix) is a management tool that has been especially developed to evaluate and improve the current responsibility distribution in the organizational projects among employees. According to the Google Books Ngram Viewer, the RACI matrix was firstly mentioned in 1986 year by American scholars (Galbraith & Kazanjian, 1986). The RACI matrix mainly involves the use of common spreadsheets offered by programs like MS Excel. The different roles of employees or departments are listed horizontally while the key projects are listed vertically. Each cell of the grid is filled with the letters: R - Responsible, A - Accountable, C - Consulted, and I - Informed. Melnic and Puiu (2012) further describe in detail factors which influence the construction of the matrix, for example, project team type, members' qualification and skills, or project budget.

There are several alternative matrices to the RACI matrix: PARIS, PACSI, RASCI, RASI, RACIQ, RACI-VS, CAIRO, DACI, RAPID, RATSI, DRASCI, PDQA, DCI, RASCEIO. Moreover, some variations of the RACI matrix have different purpose: RACI (alternative scheme) and ARCI (decisions). However, the most popular tool became the RACI matrix, as it is easily understandable and accessible to top management. Following up empirically on the translation of this tool to Pulkovo Airport is the focus of this bachelor thesis.

2.Research questions

airport management institutional

Contemporary qualitative studies, instead of hypothesis formulation and testing, rather pose open research questions that are derived from theory and contribute to its development using rich field data. Here, a similar approach is followed.

After analyzing the literature review on the topic of the purpose of translating ideas and models within an organization, it is essential to identify directly is it a result of different problems to be solved. One of the critical reasons of implementing ideas or models is an internal issue: for instance, a lack of clearly defined roles, responsibilities, and processes. Therefore, it is essential to find out how the roles and responsibilities have been distributed before and what results are expected after implementing new ideas and models, which may significantly affect the company's activities. Besides, introducing the specific tool, in particular, the RACI matrix, should be described. Thus, it is necessary to analyse what has been changed and how the obtained result will help to improve the work of the company. Thus, the following research question can be formulated:

Research question #1. Why was the RACI matrix as a project management tool introduced?

The way of translating ideas and models is unique; therefore, the translation approach has different stages and actors participating in the creation, dissemination and implementation of ideas and models. Nevertheless, it seems important to further identify initiators of the project, actors spreading and implementing ideas and models, and further actors being involved in the process of translating. It is also vital to determine how long such a process will last, what stages it will include and define necessary techniques and tools of translating. In addition, a better understanding of the process may help to optimize translation activities. This leads to the second research question formulated here:

Research question #2. How do these translation processes take place at Pulkovo Airport?

A number of scholars argue that the translating process should be carried out in accordance with a particular context. To describe the context, it is necessary to consider the contextual specifics of organizations in Russia as a post-Soviet emerging market, as well as the organizational field of aviation of which Pulkovo Airport is part, in particular. Due to the specific context, changes connected to the implementation of new tools and their translation may be confronted with specific obstacles as well as elements supporting change. They may include issues related to the implementation process, adhering to rules and norms that have been set up, employees' participation and so on. This leads to the third, and last, the question that will guide this research:

Research question #3. How do specifics of the Pulkovo Airport case influence the translation activities in negative or positive ways?

The following chapter elaborates on the methodology to cover these questions.

3.Methodology

3.1 Case study design.