Paradoxes and trade-offs in the front-end process of large public projects

Monique Aubry*, Serghei Floricel, Alicia Gilchrist, Richard J. Kirkham, Knut Samset, Bert Van Wee, Gro Holst Volden, Terry Williams, Ofer Zwikael

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The aim of this conceptual paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the front-end phase of large public projects, which is complex and non-linear. The point of departure relates to a number of paradoxes found along the way of the front-end. A processual approach is taken to follow the front-end over time. Considering a number of example vignettes, four paradoxes and subsequent trade-offs are discussed which affect the strategic decisions that need to be made. These are found to fit largely within four generic sub-processes identified in the front-end. Inspired from the paradox theory, we conceptualise paradoxes and trade-offs under the dynamic equilibrium model adapted for temporary organising such as large public projects. Main aim of this paper is to consider how decision-making can be improved, and managerial strategies developed that permit the acceptance of paradoxes and their resolution in a virtuous cycle leading to long term success.
Original languageEnglish
Article number2456959
Number of pages18
JournalProduction Planning and Control
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2025

Bibliographical note

Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository 'You share, we take care!' - Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care
Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.

Keywords

  • decision-making
  • Front-end
  • paradox theory
  • processual approach
  • trade-off

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Paradoxes and trade-offs in the front-end process of large public projects'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this