The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Governance Regimes for Large Complex Projects
Abstract
This paper presents a framework for building governance regimes for large complex projects. The framework is based on three sources: 1) a re-examination of a study of 60 large capital projects (Miller & Lessard, 2000), 2) the institutional, corporate, and project governance literatures and 3) interviews centered on the revision of the British Private Finance Initiative and on the development of the Norwegian project approval process. The literature tends to treat governance issues as being static, but project development processes and environments are dynamic. The governance regimes must adapt to the specific project and context, deal with emergent complexity, and change as the project development process unfolds. Learning to manage project governance regimes is difficult for organizations that are not involved in great numbers of large complex projects. The framework based on the progressive shaping of the project through the project development life cycle is designed to help overcome this dilemma.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Project shaping is the part of the front-end where ideas are formulated, tested, challenged, and reformulated in an iterative process.
“Miller and Hobbs (2005) describe project shaping as the part of the front-end where the ideas are formulated, tested, challenged, and reformulated in an iterative process.”
From Rethinking the project life cycle – how circularity challenges processes, roles and governance (2025) · cites this paper as Miller and Hobbs (2005)
The front-end phases of the project life cycle are where significant strategic decisions are made.
“The front-end phases of the project life cycle are where significant strategic decisions are made (Miller and Hobbs, 2005; Williams et al., 2019).”
From Rethinking the project life cycle – how circularity challenges processes, roles and governance (2025) · cites this paper as Miller and Hobbs, 2005
Citations
Cites
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
North, D. C. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808678 · Cited by 32,691
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- APM Governance SIG., 2004, Directing change: A guide to governance of project management.
- Bates Malcolm, 1997, Bates PFI Review.
- 10.1017/CBO9781107050891 · DOI
- HM Treasury, 2003, PFI: Meeting the investment challenge.
- 10.1017/CBO9781139174701 · DOI
- Magnussen O. M., 2005, Successful megaprojects: Ensuring quality at entry.
- Miller R., 2002, The frontiers of project management research, 201
- Miller R., 2000, The strategic management of large engineering projects: Shaping institutions, risks and governance.
- Miller R., 2000, The strategic management of large engineering projects: Shaping institutions, risks and governance, 93
- NUST, 2005, The Concept Research Program Website.
- Office of Government Commerce (OGC)., 2003, Managing successful programs.
- Williamson O. E., 1996, The mechanisms of governance., 10.1093/oso/9780195078244.001.0001 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rethinking the project life cycle – how circularity challenges processes, roles and governance
Lingegård, S., & Hedborg, S. (2025) · Project Leadership and Society · doi:10.1016/j.plas.2025.100194 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, R., & Hobbs, B.
- Affiliations
- Technological Innovation and Competitiveness, École Polytechnique, Université de Montréal
- Department of Management and Technology École des sciences de la gestion, Université du Québec à Montréal
- Venue
- Project Management Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 42-50
- ISSN
- 8756-9728
- 1938-9507
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
