The Impact of Stakeholder Management in Government Mega Projects - Research Proposal Example

Introduction

Government mega infrastructural projects often involve many parties that immensely contribute and influence their implementation either directly or indirectly. Government mega infrastructural projects also involve quite a number of stakeholders since their scope is massive in size, and their effects spill over to a large portion of the population. Some of the primary stakeholders in government mega projects include the suppliers, financiers, contractors, lawyers, the general public, consultants, designers just but to name a few. All these stakeholders have varied needs and interests in the projects and, thus a government needs to strike a balance between it and the stakeholders to ensure there is smooth implementation of the projects.

Stakeholders play a crucial role in the implementation of mega projects since their input through experience, knowledge and insights contribute to successful implementation of focal projects. Therefore, a government is required to map the needs of stakeholders and initiate mechanisms that can help it to avoid instances of conflict of interest that can jeopardise successful implementation of a project (Olander and Landin, 2005). The study will emphasise the core elements of stakeholder management in government infrastructural projects by pointing out pertinent issues as well as how they can be mitigated. Governments often engage in mega infrastructural projects that can span for over a decade and this creates room for transformation of stakeholders’ perception and personalities resulting in complexity in balancing their needs to enable a government gain support for successful project implementation.

Key Words

Stakeholder, government infrastructural projects, stakeholder management, conflict of interest

Aims

The aim of the research is to investigate factors that affect stakeholder management strategies in government infrastructural projects to avoid instances of project failure.

Objectives

• To explore both primary and secondary literature on government infrastructure projects and management of stakeholders with an aim of providing insights and tools to assist project managers in managing critical issues about stakeholder management.
• To provide a succinct recommendation aimed at promoting relationship management and conflict resolution between governments and stakeholders in infrastructural projects.
• To investigate governance and communication planning techniques that seek to support long-term infrastructural projects that involve governments.
• To examine the topic of stakeholder management in government infrastructural projects and the manner in which external stakeholders influence projects as well as the modalities that ought to be implemented to wade such influence from affecting project implementation.

Search Strategy

The research will employ a search strategy that implements the use of keywords to retrieve information on the topic under investigation. Some of the keywords and phrases that will be utilized include the following; stakeholder, government infrastructural projects, stakeholder management and conflict of interest in focal projects. Since this is a desktop review and literature study, the university’s online library portal and the Internet, in general, will be utilised to source information for the topic under study. Based on the keywords that have been identified above, relevant peer-reviewed articles will be retrieved from online libraries and databases and then analysed on their suitability for the topic under investigation. Ideally, four items will be utilised as primary sources while the rest will serve as secondary sources that will be used to affirm the insights that have been underpinned by the main sources.

It is prudent that the topic under investigation has not been extensively explored by scholars and thus limited scholarly literature is expected. In light of that perspective, the researcher will not have a difficult time sorting and analysing the kind of articles that will be suitable for the research. However, for the few sources that will be retrieved due diligence will be conducted to ensure they are not only suitable for providing useful insights that will facilitate the study in accomplishing its objectives.

The mechanism that was employed in selecting the primary sources involved an in-depth analysis of the content of the articles that were gathered from online libraries and databases as well as evaluating the degree to which they contribute towards the objective of the study. For instance, Aaltonen, K., and Kujala, J., 2010. A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in a global project was selected as a primary source since it provided valuable insights on stakeholder management in mega projects based on numerous case studies from different countries. The source outlines mechanisms on how mega infrastructural projects can be designed and implemented in an efficient manner while managing the interest of its stakeholders. Ideally, an essential element in the article was the fact that it identified the problems related to stakeholder in mega infrastructural projects as well as the manner in which they can be managed. El-Gohary, N.M., Osman, H. and El-Derby, T.E., 2006. Stakeholder management for public-private partnerships offers useful insights into the topic of stakeholder management by comparing five different case studies where government infrastructural projects faced stakeholder related challenges that threatened their implementation.

Similarly, the article outlines various influence strategies that project stakeholders utilise to shape their salience in government projects as well as different response strategies that focal projects employ to quell pressure from their stakeholders. Ward, S. and Chapman, C., 2008. Interested parties and uncertainty management in projects is yet another primary source that was selected for the research. Among the issue that made this article make it into the list of the primary sources is the fact that it elaborates the related challenges that face stakeholder management in government projects and the methodologies to solve those issues. In essence, all the articles that were retrieved were critically analysed and evaluated before they would be employed for the purpose of the study.

Literature Review

Numerous definitions have been advanced about the term stakeholder. However, according to Fassin (2009), a stakeholder is any individual, group of persons or organisation that has a legitimate interest in a project. Additionally, these parties should be in a position to affect or be affected by the organisation with their managerial behaviors. Alternatively, Ward and Chapman (2008) define a stakeholder as an individual that shares a particular set of understanding and meaning concerning the development of a given project. Despite their difference in terminology, all these definitions point to the fact that a stakeholder is a party that has an interest in a project. Ideally, there are different types of stakeholder and the levels to which they affect or are affected by projects differ. Thus, stakeholder management is the strategic balance of the interest of different parties in a project with the aim of ensuring successful implementation of that initiative (Olander and Landin, 2005). However, there are two types of stakeholders, external and internal stakeholder. Internal stakeholders are those that do not contribute to the progress or implementation of the project but have interests in the same. On the other hand, external stakeholders are those parties that influence the implementation of the project through their power or influence. Ideally, the manner in which stakeholders are managed has significant ramifications on the overall implementation of the project. Mega projects like the ones undertaken by governments often involve high levels of subcontracting in the sense that the primary contractor will outsource some part of the works to another firm to ensure timely and effectiveness in project implementation. In that perspective, project implementation will be influenced by effectiveness in stakeholder management.

Aaltonen and Kujala (2010), argues that before a project team can embark in managing the interests of stakeholders, they must first be identified and categorised according to various parameters on the project in question. Ideally, government infrastructural projects involve numerous stakeholders. Thus, it is crucial for the project team to identify all the possible interested parties and gauge them in the order of their importance to the initiative. Some stakeholders are only focused on their self-interest with evil plans of derailing project implementation. In that perspective, the project team should discern the stakeholder that are deemed necessary to the project and neglect the rest since they do not add intrinsic value to the project. Additionally, it is worth noting that project success is not only measured by the extent to which the milestones have been achieved within the stipulated timeframes while utilising given resources. Stakeholder engagement is very crucial in gauging the success of government projects.

Fassin (2009) states that a majority of government infrastructural projects are meant for the benefits of the public as the ultimate users. Given the fact that the public as a stakeholder in the projects is a broad group it is often difficult for the project team to discern the needs and interest of these groups to ensure successful implementation. In that light, the government as the owner of the project will have to devise a mechanism that will provide general interest of the project is taking into consideration to avoid derailing implementation. Ideally, government infrastructural projects involve many high-level stakeholders such as investors, external donors, monitoring groups, environmental lobby organisations just to name but a few (Fassin, 2009). Given the extensive nature of stakeholder in any particular project, it is prudent that despite however whole the project team will design the initiative it will not capture the interest of each group equally. It is from such instances that groups file legal suits in court to stop the implementation of projects due to unaddressed issues. Typically, it is not the wish of any project team to see its initiative halted due to reasons of stakeholder non-engagement. Ideally, a majority of the projects that encounter such issues end up failing mainly because they did not map the interest of its stakeholders before their implementation.

According to Aaltonen and Kujala (2010), project teams seek to understand the nature of the relationship between various interested parties and the system to govern the manner in which they will be engaged in decision-making. For instance, in the case of infrastructural projects that are undertaken by the government, most of these initiatives are funded by donor money or loans from development banks. In that regard, the project financiers should have a relationship that is on board with the project team since their dissatisfaction can lead to the termination of the program. In essence, the manner in which different stakeholder relate with the project team depends on their interest and influence in the project (El-Gohary, Osman and El-Diraby, 2006). In the case of financiers, they might have little or no interest in the project, but their influence is massive for their contribution to the actualisation of the program. In that sense, the interest of the general public should not supersede that of the financiers since the project is meant for the right of the public and thus limited input will be required from regarding technical support.

Fassin (2009); Aaltonen and Kujala (2010) argue that government infrastructural projects are prone to various worldview most of which distort or rather drift away from the best interest of the program. A majority of the stakeholders in government projects are not agitating for best practice during project implementation but seek to advance their individual goals in the disguise of being persons of interest in the initiatives. Thus, project success will be determined by the ability of the project team to align the different world views that may be advanced with the core objectives of the program. However, according to Ward and Chapman (2008), recognising that people are the project is the initial step towards stakeholder engagement. Ideally, acknowledging that fact will act as a step of identifying the pertinent issues among the stakeholders that will be addressed by the project during its implementation phase. A common problem with government infrastructural projects is the fact that the public that forms the largest group of stakeholders is significantly broad to the extent that it becomes problematic for the project team to understand, engage and manage it effectively (Furneaux, Brown and McCabe, 2008).

According to Fassin (2009), stakeholder management models ought to be grounded on the understanding that they should promote a common ground for all the parties that are involved in the project. Ideally, implementing a strategic balance between the interests of various stakeholders is the ultimate technique of effectively managing stakeholder in a project. Based on the stakeholder theory, a project has a relationship to numerous groups that are often affected by its decisions. In essence, as long as the project team will be making decisions that are binding to the external environment it will have stakeholders that will claim an interest in the project (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2010). The engagement between stakeholders and the project team will be shaped by the nature of their relationship regarding the processes and outcomes of the initiative. However, it is worth noting that the interests of legitimate stakeholder are of intrinsic value to the system in this case the government since no single set of interests can be assumed to be superior to the others. In essence, according to this theory, stakeholder management should include employee engagement techniques to ensure all parties that have interests in the project are engaged as long as they are legitimate partners (Aaltonen and Kujala, 2010)

The instrumental theory outlines a relationship between stakeholder management and the overall performance of the project regarding growth and profitability. It is prudent that most of the government infrastructural projects are value adding initiatives that are aimed at boosting the economy as well as alleviating the well-being of the neighbouring communities. In that regard, these projects are commissioned with the long-term objectives in mind for the overall good of the nation. In some cases, a project may be deemed adverse from a short run perspective but if given time it will turn out to be of immense benefit to the nation. In that light, the government through its project team should understand the interest of its stakeholders in such projects as well as make them understand the larger objective of infrastructural projects. It is prudent that even the capital that is used to finance such initiatives probably may be repaid by the next generation or two generations down the line. Thus, in line with ensuring the projected growth and profitability, stakeholders ought to be managed in an efficient manner to avoid their effects from spilling over to the course of the project (Sutterfield et al., 2006).

Ward and Chapman (2008) states that the stakeholder salience model is one of the most elaborate techniques of managing stakeholder in projects. According to the model, stakeholders’ salience is classified into three main categories namely; urgency, legitimacy and power. Ideally, these attributes determine the manner in which a stakeholder will be regarded by the project team in the decision-making process. For instance, stakeholders that have a legitimate claim in a project for example land owners in the case of a road project designed to pass through their properties will be highly regarded during decision-making since their engagement is crucial to the successful implementation of the project. Power and urgency are equally considered but the extent to which one element supersedes the other is the cause of criticism for this model (Freeman, 2010).

Ward and Chapman (2008) disagree with this model by arguing that all stakeholders are equally important for project success regardless of the salience that they possess. He reiterates the notion that project success is neither measured by how equitable it has utilised funds nor by the manner in which it has been able to beat its milestones (Tan, Pan, and Lim, 2005). The extent to which a project identifies its stakeholders and engages them in the process is the ultimate measure of the success of any focal project. Majority of government infrastructural projects are not commissioned with the primary objective of profit making. Rather they are undertaken for the social benefit of the society as a whole. For instance, a road network that passes through a remote village in a country is conducted to ensure the area is accessible to the rest of the nation.

According to El-Gohary, Osman and El-Diraby (2006), a network of stakeholders will significantly influence the manner in which the focal project behaves with regard to the stakeholders. Ideally, the project team of government infrastructural projects does not respond to the concerns of individual stakeholders but those of collective groups in the stakeholder network. Apparently, it is difficult for the project team to manage the interest of hundreds of stakeholders since it is time consuming and it might require additional resources that may not be available. In that perspective stakeholder management and engagement is best accomplished when the government deals with a network of stakeholders that are bound by a common interest.

Olander and Landin (2005), however, argue that government project teams should be in constant communication with all stakeholders to ensure all parties are engaged and for the ultimate success of the initiatives. The industry network theory articulates that in any given industry a network affects the actions involved and their reaction is binding to all the participants. Given that notion, the nature or size of stakeholders in government projects is not significant; the project team should try to accommodate and respond to the issue of all parties involved since their contribution whether direct or indirect will affect the smooth implementation of the initiatives (Aaltonen, 2010).

Conclusion

Stakeholder management is a crucial element in project management and it ought to be handled efficiently to ensure successful implementation of projects. Government projects involve a significant number of stakeholders that have varied interests and influences. Given the enormous number of stakeholders that government projects are prone to, it is prudent for the project teams to embrace addressing networks of stakeholder rather than individual parties. Despite the fact that the influence, power and legitimacy that various groups of stakeholders vary in government projects success in their implementation is measured by the extent they engage all the stakeholders in their implementation. Ideally, stakeholder management is not an isolated discipline and thus its objectives should be aligned with the overall goals of the project. Numerous scholarly articles have reiterated the notion that stakeholder management can only be implemented successfully by identifying the issues pertinent with individual parties and coming up with a solution to all problems. A common problem with government infrastructural projects is the fact that the public that forms the largest group of stakeholders is significantly broad to the extent that it becomes problematic for the project team to understand, engage and manage it effectively.