Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
Project Management and Construction Department, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Highlights:
Comparing the findings of both empiricist and rationalist methods in identifying the most critical stakeholders is very convergent
Map of stakeholder communication shows the most critical stakeholders based on the different index of SNA.
Introduction. An important aspect of improving the quality of urban life is existence of appropriate facilities and infrastructures on urban passages, including the design and construction of urban overpasses and underpasses, as a large-scale urban project. One of the goals of urban development projects is to reduce traffic load in cities and to address people’s demands and solve their problems in that regard. Implementation of such projects will undoubtedly be effective in improvement of the quality of urban furniture and provision of comfort and welfare for citizens. They involve a wide range of stakeholders with different levels of interest, and there is an essential need for adequate communication and exchange between them. The present study addresses stakeholders’ prioritization and communication in a project involving the construction of an intersection with multi-level crossroads in the city of Urmia, Iran using the interest-power matrix as an empirical method and social network analysis as a rationalist method.
Theoretical framework. Improper management of stakeholders in an urban project can cause political, social, and cultural problems. The created challenges are not purely technical, and require the management of stakeholders based on their social, cultural, and political backgrounds with different strategies and goals (Aaltonen & Kujala, 2016). In the literature, methods of stakeholder analysis are divided into two categories: empirical and rational. Empiricists assert that knowledge is inductive and obtained through experience; therefore, the analysis of stakeholders is based on a small number of them (the key stakeholders). This model is based on the fact that the key stakeholders have a great deal of information about their expectations and other stakeholders. Decision-makers can make optimal decisions making subjective judgments in that regard. However, many researchers have criticized this approach for several reasons, including the negligence of some stakeholders and their mediating measures affecting other stakeholders and, ultimately, the project. Moreover, the accuracy of the results decreases as the complexity of the project increases, resulting in the formation of a rationalist approach to stakeholder analysis. The basis of knowledge acquisition in the rationalist approach is knowledge independent of experience. In this approach, trust in results is enhanced through an attempt to involve all stakeholders rather than to focus on the key ones. The decisions reflect the actual relationships between stakeholders, making up an excellent way to identify hidden stakeholders who may have little evident impact. However, they can cause overall disruptions in urban development projects (Yang, 2014).
Methodology. In this qualitative research, which was performed using a one-sample case study, documents on the project and semi-structured interviews were used for data collection. The purposeful sampling method and the snowball technique were used, and 17 stakeholders were finally identified for the project. The data were analyzed using the interest-power matrix (with the brainstorming technique) and the NodeXL software (for social network analysis).
Results and discussion. The results demonstrate that the primary stakeholders in the interest-power matrix include the municipality, people, city council, and residents, in that order. Moreover, the municipal stakeholder, who has gained the greatest interest and power to influence the project, has been the implementer as well. On the other hand, the Water and Wastewater Company, the Department of Electricity, and the Telecommunications Company have obtained the least interest and power in the project. As for the distribution of stakeholders in the interest-power matrix, no specific focal points were achieved in the upper quarters of the matrix. In the social networks analysis, however, people, municipalities, city councils, and contractors exhibited the highest priorities, and suppliers, the environment, and oil companies had the lowest priorities. The residents, city council, and municipality played the most crucial role in the communication between all the stakeholders. In terms of communication power, the military organization was highest, located adjacent to the project. Furthermore, the response times between the stakeholders and the frequency of response were relatively unfavorable. Finally, an urban development project could achieve different results in terms of its stakeholders’ importance and prioritization through changes in its use and framework although it has a significant impact on the city, and involves a wide range of stakeholders.
Conclusion. The comparison between the findings of the empiricist and rationalist methods in the identification of the most crucial stakeholders exhibits high convergence. There are differences, however, in the identification of the least important stakeholders. Use of empiricist and rationalist methods can help identify, prioritize, and manage stakeholders. To some extent, they cover each other’s shortcomings, and use of a combination of the two methods to analyze stakeholders can perhaps be the right solution. The findings of this research can help the managers of urban transport development projects that involve large numbers of stakeholders to manage them as successfully as possible and to identify and analyze the positions and importance of the stakeholders involved in such large-scale projects, especially those who seem to have less prominent roles but greater influence. The project may gain better cost, time, and quality during the construction phases, which involve the greatest fund and longest time, by spending less time and cost but involving a wider range of effective stakeholders in the initial phases.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)