Istnieje nowsza wersja tego artykułu opublikowanego 2023-12-06. Przeczytaj wersję najnowszą.
Wykorzystanie koncepcji living labu w praktyce zarządzania (z) interesariuszami projektów
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33119/SIP.2023.193.6Słowa kluczowe:
zarządzanie projektem, laboratorium innowacji, projektem, interesariusze projektu, living labAbstrakt
Celem artykułu jest przybliżenie zagadnienia living labu (LL) i możliwych obszarów wykorzystania narzędzi LL w praktyce projektowej, szczególnie w obszarze zarządzania interesariuszami projektu. Wykorzystanie metod i praktyk dotyczących współpracy i ko-kreacji z interesariuszami, jakie oferują living laby, może wspierać udaną realizację złożonych projektów. LL działają w modelu poczwórnej helisy, który zakłada, że współpraca podejmowana jest pomiędzy sektorami naukowym, biznesowym, publicznym oraz społecznym. Jednocześnie tym, co jest ich cechą dystynktywną w porównaniu z innymi formami współpracy, jest fundament, na jakim się opierają – otwarte innowacje i partycypacyjny charakter współpracy. W zarządzaniu projektami, coraz częstsze odejście od modelu kaskadowego w kierunku zwinnego, daje wiele możliwości zastosowania metod partycypacyjnego wypracowania rozwiązań. Zrozumienie potrzeb interesariuszy projektu, zarządzanie ich oczekiwaniami i włączanie ich w proces decyzyjny może przebiegać w bardziej udany sposób, gdy zarządzający projektami zaczerpną inspiracje z praktyk stosowanych w living labach.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Bibliografia
1. Achterkamp M. C., Vos J. F. J. [2008], Investigating the use of the stakeholder notion in project management literature, a meta-analysis, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 26 (7), s. 749–757, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.001.
2. Almirall E., Wareham J. [2011], Living Labs: arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation, „Technology Analysis & Strategic Management”, vol. 23 (1), s. 87–102, doi:10.1080/0953732 5.2011.537110.
3. Axelsson K., Melin U., Lindgren I. [2010], Exploring the importance of citizen participation and involvement in e‐government projects, „Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy”, vol. 4 (4), s. 299–321, doi:10.1108/17506161011081309.
4. Bajgier S. M., Maragah H. D., Saccucci M. S., Verzilli A., Prybutok V. R. [1991], Introducing Students to Community Operations Research by Using a City Neighborhood As A Living Laboratory, „Operations Research”, vol. 39 (5), s. 701–709, doi:10.1287/opre.39.5.701.
5. Bartelt V. L., Urbaczewski A., Mueller A. G., Sarker S. [2020], Enabling collaboration and innovation in Denver’s smart city through a living lab: a social capital perspective, „European Journal of Information Systems”, vol. 29 (4), s. 369–387, doi:10.1080/0960085X.2020.1762127.
6. Bronson K., Devkota R., Nguyen V. [2021], Moving toward Generalizability? A Scoping Review on Measuring the Impact of Living Labs, „Sustainability”, vol. 13 (2), s. 502.
7. Chung K. S. K., Eskerod P., Jepsen A. L., Zhang J. [2023], Response strategies for community stakeholder engagement on social media: A case study of a large infrastructure project, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102495, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijproman.2023.102495.
8. Cleland D. [1986], Project stakeholder management, „Project Management Journal”, vol. 17, s. 36–44.
9. Dekker R., Franco Contreras J., Meijer A. [2020], The Living Lab as a Methodology for Public Administration Research: a Systematic Literature Review of its Applications in the Social Sciences, „International Journal of Public Administration”, vol. 43 (14), s. 1207–1217, doi:10.1080/01900692.2019.1668410.
10. Eskerod P., Jepsen A. L. [2013], Project Stakeholder Management, Routledge, Burlington.
11. European Network of Living Labs [2023], ENoLL – Jagiellonian University Training. Training conducted by Francesca Spagnoli and Joanna Karaś, Presentation, Kraków, 21–23 March.
12. Grant M. J., Booth A. [2009], A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies, „Health Information & Libraries Journal”, vol. 26, s. 91–108.
13. Hoffman E. J., Kohut M., Prusak L. [2022], The Smart Mission: NASA’s Lessons for Managing Knowledge, People, and Projects, The MIT Press.
14. Hong Huang J., Thomas E. [2021], A Review of Living Lab Research and Methods for User Involvement, „Technology Innovation Management Review”, vol. 11 (9/10).
15. Ika L. A., Pinto J. K. [2022], The “re-meaning” of project success: Updating and recalibrating for a modern project management, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 40 (7), s. 835–848, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.08.001.
16. Kier C., Aaltonen K., Whyte J., Huemann M. [2023], How projects co-create value with stakeholders: The role of ideology and inquiry in spanning the temporary-permanent boundary, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102482, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102482.
17. Kroh J., Schultz C. [2023], In favor or against: The influence of skeptical stakeholders in urban innovation projects for green transformation, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (7), s. 102515, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102515.
18. Lehmann V., Dubé P., Frangioni M. [2017], Are Living Labs a relevant approach for actual project management? Paper presented at the IRNOP, Boston.
19. Lehmann V., Frangioni M., Dubé P. [2015], Living Lab as knowledge system: an actual approach for managing urban service projects? „Journal of Knowledge Management”, vol. 19 (5), s. 1087–1107, doi:10.1108/JKM-02-2015–0058.
20. Lupp G., Zingraff-Hamed A., Huang J. J., Oen A., Pauleit S. [2021], Living Labs – A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions, „Sustainability”, vol. 13 (1), s. 188.
21. Marone L., Onofrio R., Masella C. [2020], The Italian Case of Lecco Innovation Living Lab: Stakeholders’ Needs and Activities to Contribute to the Technological Innovation Process in Healthcare, „Sustainability”, vol. 12 (24), s. 10266.
22. Mastelic J. [2019], Stakeholders’ engagement in the co-design of energy conservation interventions: The case of the Energy Living Lab, University of Lausanne.
23. Mok K. Y., Shen G. Q., Yang J. [2015], Stakeholder management studies in mega construction projects: A review and future directions, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 33 (2), s. 446–457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.08.007.
24. Morkan B., Bertels H. M. J., Sheth A., Holahan P. J. [2023], Building megaproject resilience with stakeholders: The roles of citizenship behavior and critical transition mechanisms, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102485, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102485.
25. de Oliveira G., Rabechini Jr R. [2019], Stakeholder management influence on trust in a project: A quantitative study, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 37 (1), s. 131–144, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.11.001.
26. Pargar F., Kujala J., Aaltonen K., Ruutu S. [2019], Value creation dynamics in a project alliance, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 37 (5), s. 716–730, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.12.006.
27. PMI [2013], A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), Fifth Edition, Project Management Institute.
28. Sanabria J., Davidson A.‑L., Romero M., Quintana T. [2020], Macro-dissemination of Maker Cultures: 21st century competencies through an Ideaton, „Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED)”, vol. 20 (62), doi:10.6018/red.398381.
29. Snis U. L., Olsson A. K., Bernhard I. [2021], Becoming a smart old town – How to manage stakeholder collaboration and cultural heritage, „Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development”, vol. 11 (4), s. 627–641, doi:10.1108/JCHMSD-10-2020-0148.
30. Trocki M., Grucza B. [2009], Zarządzanie interesariuszami projektu, w: Trocki M., Sońta--Drączkowska E. (red.), Strategiczne zarządzanie projektami, Bizzare, Warszawa.
31. Urbinati A., Landoni P., Cococcioni F., De Giudici L. [2021], Stakeholder management in open innovation projects: a multiple case study analysis, „European Journal of Innovation Management”, vol. 24 (5), s. 1595–1624, doi:10.1108/EJIM-03-2020–0076.
32. Wallace K., Michopoulou E. [2023], Stakeholder Requirements and Value Cocreation in Events, „Event Management”, vol. 27 (2), s. 281–299, doi:https://doi.org/10.3727/152599521X16367300695744. 33. Wolsink M. [2010], Contested environmental policy infrastructure: socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities, „Environmental Impact Assessment Review”,vol. 30 (5), s. 302–311.
34. Wyrozębski P. [2017], Badanie panelowe metodologicznych aspektów angażowania interesariuszy na przykładzie metodyki PMbok guide, „Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej”, nr 114, s. 617–634.
35. Wyrozębski P. [2021], Zwinność. Od zwinnych zespołów do zwinnego zarządzania, Oficyna
Wydawnicza SGH, Warszawa.
2. Almirall E., Wareham J. [2011], Living Labs: arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation, „Technology Analysis & Strategic Management”, vol. 23 (1), s. 87–102, doi:10.1080/0953732 5.2011.537110.
3. Axelsson K., Melin U., Lindgren I. [2010], Exploring the importance of citizen participation and involvement in e‐government projects, „Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy”, vol. 4 (4), s. 299–321, doi:10.1108/17506161011081309.
4. Bajgier S. M., Maragah H. D., Saccucci M. S., Verzilli A., Prybutok V. R. [1991], Introducing Students to Community Operations Research by Using a City Neighborhood As A Living Laboratory, „Operations Research”, vol. 39 (5), s. 701–709, doi:10.1287/opre.39.5.701.
5. Bartelt V. L., Urbaczewski A., Mueller A. G., Sarker S. [2020], Enabling collaboration and innovation in Denver’s smart city through a living lab: a social capital perspective, „European Journal of Information Systems”, vol. 29 (4), s. 369–387, doi:10.1080/0960085X.2020.1762127.
6. Bronson K., Devkota R., Nguyen V. [2021], Moving toward Generalizability? A Scoping Review on Measuring the Impact of Living Labs, „Sustainability”, vol. 13 (2), s. 502.
7. Chung K. S. K., Eskerod P., Jepsen A. L., Zhang J. [2023], Response strategies for community stakeholder engagement on social media: A case study of a large infrastructure project, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102495, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijproman.2023.102495.
8. Cleland D. [1986], Project stakeholder management, „Project Management Journal”, vol. 17, s. 36–44.
9. Dekker R., Franco Contreras J., Meijer A. [2020], The Living Lab as a Methodology for Public Administration Research: a Systematic Literature Review of its Applications in the Social Sciences, „International Journal of Public Administration”, vol. 43 (14), s. 1207–1217, doi:10.1080/01900692.2019.1668410.
10. Eskerod P., Jepsen A. L. [2013], Project Stakeholder Management, Routledge, Burlington.
11. European Network of Living Labs [2023], ENoLL – Jagiellonian University Training. Training conducted by Francesca Spagnoli and Joanna Karaś, Presentation, Kraków, 21–23 March.
12. Grant M. J., Booth A. [2009], A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies, „Health Information & Libraries Journal”, vol. 26, s. 91–108.
13. Hoffman E. J., Kohut M., Prusak L. [2022], The Smart Mission: NASA’s Lessons for Managing Knowledge, People, and Projects, The MIT Press.
14. Hong Huang J., Thomas E. [2021], A Review of Living Lab Research and Methods for User Involvement, „Technology Innovation Management Review”, vol. 11 (9/10).
15. Ika L. A., Pinto J. K. [2022], The “re-meaning” of project success: Updating and recalibrating for a modern project management, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 40 (7), s. 835–848, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.08.001.
16. Kier C., Aaltonen K., Whyte J., Huemann M. [2023], How projects co-create value with stakeholders: The role of ideology and inquiry in spanning the temporary-permanent boundary, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102482, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102482.
17. Kroh J., Schultz C. [2023], In favor or against: The influence of skeptical stakeholders in urban innovation projects for green transformation, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (7), s. 102515, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102515.
18. Lehmann V., Dubé P., Frangioni M. [2017], Are Living Labs a relevant approach for actual project management? Paper presented at the IRNOP, Boston.
19. Lehmann V., Frangioni M., Dubé P. [2015], Living Lab as knowledge system: an actual approach for managing urban service projects? „Journal of Knowledge Management”, vol. 19 (5), s. 1087–1107, doi:10.1108/JKM-02-2015–0058.
20. Lupp G., Zingraff-Hamed A., Huang J. J., Oen A., Pauleit S. [2021], Living Labs – A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions, „Sustainability”, vol. 13 (1), s. 188.
21. Marone L., Onofrio R., Masella C. [2020], The Italian Case of Lecco Innovation Living Lab: Stakeholders’ Needs and Activities to Contribute to the Technological Innovation Process in Healthcare, „Sustainability”, vol. 12 (24), s. 10266.
22. Mastelic J. [2019], Stakeholders’ engagement in the co-design of energy conservation interventions: The case of the Energy Living Lab, University of Lausanne.
23. Mok K. Y., Shen G. Q., Yang J. [2015], Stakeholder management studies in mega construction projects: A review and future directions, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 33 (2), s. 446–457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.08.007.
24. Morkan B., Bertels H. M. J., Sheth A., Holahan P. J. [2023], Building megaproject resilience with stakeholders: The roles of citizenship behavior and critical transition mechanisms, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 41 (5), s. 102485, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102485.
25. de Oliveira G., Rabechini Jr R. [2019], Stakeholder management influence on trust in a project: A quantitative study, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 37 (1), s. 131–144, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.11.001.
26. Pargar F., Kujala J., Aaltonen K., Ruutu S. [2019], Value creation dynamics in a project alliance, „International Journal of Project Management”, vol. 37 (5), s. 716–730, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.12.006.
27. PMI [2013], A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), Fifth Edition, Project Management Institute.
28. Sanabria J., Davidson A.‑L., Romero M., Quintana T. [2020], Macro-dissemination of Maker Cultures: 21st century competencies through an Ideaton, „Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED)”, vol. 20 (62), doi:10.6018/red.398381.
29. Snis U. L., Olsson A. K., Bernhard I. [2021], Becoming a smart old town – How to manage stakeholder collaboration and cultural heritage, „Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development”, vol. 11 (4), s. 627–641, doi:10.1108/JCHMSD-10-2020-0148.
30. Trocki M., Grucza B. [2009], Zarządzanie interesariuszami projektu, w: Trocki M., Sońta--Drączkowska E. (red.), Strategiczne zarządzanie projektami, Bizzare, Warszawa.
31. Urbinati A., Landoni P., Cococcioni F., De Giudici L. [2021], Stakeholder management in open innovation projects: a multiple case study analysis, „European Journal of Innovation Management”, vol. 24 (5), s. 1595–1624, doi:10.1108/EJIM-03-2020–0076.
32. Wallace K., Michopoulou E. [2023], Stakeholder Requirements and Value Cocreation in Events, „Event Management”, vol. 27 (2), s. 281–299, doi:https://doi.org/10.3727/152599521X16367300695744. 33. Wolsink M. [2010], Contested environmental policy infrastructure: socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities, „Environmental Impact Assessment Review”,vol. 30 (5), s. 302–311.
34. Wyrozębski P. [2017], Badanie panelowe metodologicznych aspektów angażowania interesariuszy na przykładzie metodyki PMbok guide, „Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej”, nr 114, s. 617–634.
35. Wyrozębski P. [2021], Zwinność. Od zwinnych zespołów do zwinnego zarządzania, Oficyna
Wydawnicza SGH, Warszawa.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
2023-12-06
Wersje
- 2024-03-20 - (2)
- 2023-12-06 - (1)
Jak cytować
Jałocha, B. . (2023). Wykorzystanie koncepcji living labu w praktyce zarządzania (z) interesariuszami projektów. Studia I Prace Kolegium Zarządzania I Finansów , (193), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.33119/SIP.2023.193.6
Numer
Dział
Dział główny
