Search results

This paper investigates the emphasis placed on different managerial roles by the project manager in a public merger and change project.

A research model was designed based on six management roles: leader, resource allocator, spokesman, entrepreneur, liaison and monitor. Empirical data were collected using in-depth interviews. The studied case concerns a large public merger and change project between two municipalities in Norway.

The paper reveals that the project manager emphasized the externally oriented entrepreneur role mostly. The internally oriented resource allocator role that focuses on managing the project was least emphasized. The research identifies a gap between needed and actual competence in basic project management as a barrier to exercise the resource allocator role more thoroughly.

Future research should investigate other public merger and change projects so that these findings may be generalized.

This research concludes that project managers in public change projects should be more internally oriented towards the resource allocator role. Furthermore, public project managers need to make sure that they possess the necessary technical project management competence to practice the resource allocator role effectively.

Rather than stressing the importance of leadership in general to manage a project, this paper is original as it applies a set of management roles to empirically study what a public project manager practice.

The purpose of this paper is to study the reform of public purchasing directives initiated by the European Union (EU) and discuss them in light of the criticism against existing public purchasing directives.

A literature review of empirical articles is critical to existing public purchasing directives to summarize the main directions and categories of their criticism, and a thorough reading of the proposed reform of the public purchasing directives is carried out to see if the changes will answer some or all of the criticism directed toward the public purchasing directives.

The reforms seem to be a step in the right direction, particularly with respect to public organizations possibility to support innovation and new product and service development, but little change in the possibilities for development of strategic, long-term relationships.

The reform has just been introduced, and so the analysis of the possible effects of the reform is not based on empirical data (since such data do not exist yet), but mostly on the authors experience in the field and through a comparison with selected literature.

An early assessment of the possible effects of the reform regarding public procurement directives in the EU area is introduced.

Public procurement is important in itself but is also an important intervening force in some business networks. Two aspects are of particular interest. The first is that public purchasing is an important ingredient in public policy in relation to a number of business networks; it is substantial in areas such as transportation, communication, health care and defence, where the ‘public’ is often the most dominating actor. As such it can be one of the measures in innovation policies, as well as in regional and local development policies. The second aspect is that public purchasing is highly regulated by law, based mostly on the assumption of ‘homogeneous, competitive, product markets’. That restricts public procurement in forming close and continuous supplier relationships, thus making more effective use of these relationships, particularly for development purposes. A consequence is that suppliers’ capabilities cannot be used in the same way as in the private sphere. The chapter concludes with a discussion of current developments in regulation that allow closer collaboration with suppliers and the likely benefits, a feature that has been evidenced in prior Industrial Marketing and Purchasing (IMP) research.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

In diminishing order of importance the management roles were entrepreneur, leader, spokesman, monitor, liaison, resource allocator.

The briefing saves busy executives, strategists and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

The purpose of this paper is to present three heuristics for choosing supplier selection criteria. By considering the balance between the expected relative effort and benefit of using different selection criteria, the heuristics suggest which criteria should be prioritized. The heuristics serve to develop our understanding of the search and evaluation heuristics used in supplier selection and to facilitate further research.

The research is primarily theoretical, yet draws on empirical studies of supplier selection. The theoretical basis is Simon’s notion of procedural rationality (Simon, 1976). The author makes the general notion of procedural rationality more concrete for supplier selection by formally describing three heuristics for choosing selection criteria. The heuristics share the same logic but differ in terms of the precision of the input information required from the purchaser. The paper provides illustrations of the heuristics.

It appears that procedural rationality can be specified for the process of designing the supplier selection process by explicitly recognizing the cost and value of selection criteria. There is no one way of doing this, but at the most basic level, it requires an ordinal ranking of criteria. Already such a rudimentary, qualitative, assessment can help identifying suitable criteria. The heuristics developed appear compatible with established approaches for the subsequent selection of suppliers.

The paper addresses the early stage of supplier selection which has been largely ignored in the literature.