doing things right and doing the right things time and timing in projects

6
Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects Hans Ra¨mo¨* School of Business, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden Abstract This paper discusses the relationship between time and project management in the context of clock-time’s rule of doing things right according to deadlines, and doing the right things at the right moment, irrespective of clock-time. It is argued that clock-time (chronos time) is the ruling factor in efficiency and timely moments (kairos time) are crucial in questions of effectiveness. This distinction is accentuated by the importance in managing project organisations to do the right things in that such organisations are less institutionalised than more permanent (going concern) organisations and have to deal with unplanned situations more frequently as compared with permanent organisations. # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved. Keywords: Chronos; Effectiveness; Efficiency; Kairos (and IJPM keywords:); Managing projects; Time 1. Timely moments and project management Nowadays, a great deal of attention is being paid to the notion of time and temporality. Still, temporal aspects in organisation studies are somewhat neglected and temporal aspects in studies of project organisation are no exception. Nevertheless, some scholars have chosen the assignment to enter into different aspects of the question of time and temporality in organisational settings, for instance Adam [1,2], Bluedorn and Denhart [3], Blyton et al. [4], Burrell [5], Butler [6], Clark [7,8], Lee and Liebe- nau [9], Whipp [10], Zerubavel [11]. Reflexive studies on the aspects of time and temporality in project organisa- tions—beyond more or less standardised time manage- ment techniques—are even fewer, for instance Lindkvist et al. [12], Lundin and So¨derholm [13], Thoms and Pinto [14]. Several writers have also noted that the qua- litative analysis of organisational time has been con- sistently overlooked, for instance Adam [1,2], Bluedorn and Denhart [3], Burrell [5], Butler [6], Zerubavel [11]. Almost without exception this attention to the limitations of treating organisational time as exclusively quantita- tive and homogenous (i.e. clock-time) still rely upon an understanding of time as chronological time, depicted as linear, circular, or spiral time. This paper focuses on different notions of chronological and non-chronological time in organisational settings, with particular focus on managing project organisations. The paper begins with a brief overview of some notions of chronological and non-chronological time and then goes on to mention Drucker’s well-known division between efficiency and effectiveness [15]. The aim (and the possible novelty) of this paper is to bring together chronological and non-chronological notions of time with questions of doing things right, according to the book and the clock and doing the right things at the right moments. It is claimed in this paper that the difference between doing things right and doing the right things implies questions of chronological and non-chron- ological time, particularly in managing project organi- sations. This is because one characteristic that is typical of project organisations is their frequent encounter with impromptu solutions. Whereas more ‘permanent’ orga- nised establishments have institutionalised their job description and rules, project organisations have to rely more on the ability to handle unexpected incidents that cannot formally be handled ‘by the book’. The powerful impact of clocks of all kinds on our contemporary society has strengthened a fixation in a clock-type understanding of time. This is not only inevitable but also in many cases desirable. However, in some instances this unidimensional understanding of time has led to a notion of time that tends to be taken- for-granted, that is, clock-time. Economic exchange time is an abstract exchange value that enables the work of people and machines to be translated into money. As such, it depends centrally 0263-7863/02/$22.00 # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved. PII: S0263-7863(02)00015-7 International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman * Tel.: +46-8-16-1209; fax: +46-8-674-74-40. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Ra¨mo¨).

Upload: hans-raemoe

Post on 03-Jul-2016

242 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

Doing things right and doing the right thingsTime and timing in projects

Hans Ramo*

School of Business, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

Abstract

This paper discusses the relationship between time and project management in the context of clock-time’s rule of doing things

right according to deadlines, and doing the right things at the right moment, irrespective of clock-time. It is argued that clock-time(chronos time) is the ruling factor in efficiency and timely moments (kairos time) are crucial in questions of effectiveness. Thisdistinction is accentuated by the importance in managing project organisations to do the right things in that such organisations are

less institutionalised than more permanent (going concern) organisations and have to deal with unplanned situations morefrequently as compared with permanent organisations. # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Chronos; Effectiveness; Efficiency; Kairos (and IJPM keywords:); Managing projects; Time

1. Timely moments and project management

Nowadays, a great deal of attention is being paid tothe notion of time and temporality. Still, temporalaspects in organisation studies are somewhat neglectedand temporal aspects in studies of project organisation areno exception. Nevertheless, some scholars have chosen theassignment to enter into different aspects of the questionof time and temporality in organisational settings, forinstance Adam [1,2], Bluedorn and Denhart [3], Blyton etal. [4], Burrell [5], Butler [6], Clark [7,8], Lee and Liebe-nau [9], Whipp [10], Zerubavel [11]. Reflexive studies onthe aspects of time and temporality in project organisa-tions—beyond more or less standardised time manage-ment techniques—are even fewer, for instance Lindkvistet al. [12], Lundin and Soderholm [13], Thoms andPinto [14]. Several writers have also noted that the qua-litative analysis of organisational time has been con-sistently overlooked, for instance Adam [1,2], Bluedornand Denhart [3], Burrell [5], Butler [6], Zerubavel [11].Almost without exception this attention to the limitationsof treating organisational time as exclusively quantita-tive and homogenous (i.e. clock-time) still rely upon anunderstanding of time as chronological time, depicted aslinear, circular, or spiral time.This paper focuses on different notions of chronological

and non-chronological time in organisational settings,

with particular focus on managing project organisations.The paper begins with a brief overview of some notionsof chronological and non-chronological time and thengoes on to mention Drucker’s well-known divisionbetween efficiency and effectiveness [15]. The aim (andthe possible novelty) of this paper is to bring togetherchronological and non-chronological notions of time withquestions of doing things right, according to the bookand the clock and doing the right things at the rightmoments. It is claimed in this paper that the differencebetween doing things right and doing the right thingsimplies questions of chronological and non-chron-ological time, particularly in managing project organi-sations. This is because one characteristic that is typicalof project organisations is their frequent encounter withimpromptu solutions. Whereas more ‘permanent’ orga-nised establishments have institutionalised their jobdescription and rules, project organisations have to relymore on the ability to handle unexpected incidents thatcannot formally be handled ‘by the book’.The powerful impact of clocks of all kinds on our

contemporary society has strengthened a fixation in aclock-type understanding of time. This is not onlyinevitable but also in many cases desirable. However, insome instances this unidimensional understanding oftime has led to a notion of time that tends to be taken-for-granted, that is, clock-time.Economic exchange time is an abstract exchange

value that enables the work of people and machines tobe translated into money. As such, it depends centrally

0263-7863/02/$22.00 # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.

PI I : S0263-7863(02 )00015-7

International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

* Tel.: +46-8-16-1209; fax: +46-8-674-74-40.

E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Ramo).

Page 2: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

on quantification that is achievable only on the basis ofthe rationalised and decontextualised time of the clock.Distanced from the variable rhythms and contextualdifference of living systems, clock-time recasts time in auniform way. It can thus be applied anywhere and atany time. In parallel, the idea of industrial productionimplies that everything is capable of being quantifiedand standardised.To comprehend the notion that time is something

beyond the successive reading of a clock is intuitivelyeasy because a human’s ability to coordinate his or herdoings has a history that is much older than the historyof mechanical clocks. This non-chronological under-standing of time is also discernible in our ability to actintelligently (judiciously) and wisely at an opportuneoccasion. For instance, in organisational settings includingmore or less permanent (Going Concern) organisationsor project organisations, there are different dimensionsof management performance. A simplistic picture of thisis that managers not only have to manage and improvewhat already exists and is already known, but they alsohave to be keenly aware and attentive of possible threatsand opportunities. The latter is an example of action in aconcrete, timely, and opportune situation, quite frequentlyregardless of clock-time, checklists, and regulations.It must be noted, however, that many permanent

(Going Concern) organisations develop more and moretowards a sort of project organisations. Consequently,any clear-cut general distinction between permanent(Going Concern) organisations and project organisationscould be questioned. Nevertheless, this paper highlightaspects of time and timing as important factors in anyproject organisation—regardless if the project is a partof a larger permanent (Going Concern) organisation orseparate from other groupings.There is, of course, an overabundance of project

organisations, ranging from recurrent projects to uniqueevents and from short events to long projects (longprojects occur most notably in the pharmaceuticalindustry). To distinguish a project organisation from amore permanent (Going Concern) organisation is noteasy, as illustrated by the following four examples:

1. In 1995, a consortium led by the Swedish build-ing contractor Skanska won a contract to build abridge linking the Oresund sound between Den-mark and Sweden. The inauguration of the 7845 mlong bridge took place in July 2000. Skanska’srailroad tunnel project through the Hallandsasenridge in southwestern Sweden has on the otherhand been dogged by problems since it began in1992 and today is still (2001) in an unfinishedstate [16]. Skanska as a building contractor wasfounded already in 1887 and Skanska’s permanentorganisation has since been involved in numerousproject organisations (i.e. building projects).

2. The organisation responsible for the StockholmWater Festival (dissolved in 1999) was an all yearround organisation for the administration of theannual festival, which in itself had a time frameof some 15 days from physically building up thefestival to dismantling at the premises. The allyear round administrative organisation of theStockholm Water Festival can be characterisedas a ‘semi-permanent’ organisation. The festivalitself was a project very limited in time, but theadministrative organisation was permanent formany years (cf. theatres).

3. The planning and implementation of 1200 pro-jects during the 365-day project Stockholm—Cultural Capital of Europe 1998 started alreadyin May 1994 and the organisation ceased to existin April 1999 [17]. This gives a clear example ofproject organisations having a pre-project, pro-ject, and a post-project phase, which extends thetime frame far beyond the actual realisation of atemporary project.

4. Local action groups that have launched numer-ous campaigns and petitions illustrate grassroots’‘earthly’ engagement as a form of a project organi-sation. One example is Nacka municipality’s‘environmental team’ (Nacka Miljoteam) east ofStockholm, which was launched in 1992 as a part ofthe Local Agenda21. The environmental team hasinitiated numerous environmental improvementprojects in the local community.

These examples of project organisations include indi-vidual projects that are limited in scope and time. Inaddition, they also tend to involve extemporaneoussituations that must be handled swiftly, without relyingon running-in periods or (non-existent) formaliseddecision-making processes. Correct timing in businessplanning implies being aware of the key economicindicators as well as the ability to handle unexpectedincidents. Apart from Skanska’s experience as a buildingcontractor, each individual building site involves unex-pected challenges and difficulties in which textbooks andmanuals are inadequate. Managers (and contractors)usually take the blame for the mistakes of their organi-sation—such as the case of Skanska’s untimely use oftoxic grouting agent in the problematic tunnel buildingthrough the Hallandsasen ridge. Yet, at the same timethe company passes on the credit for its success—forinstance in Skanska’s building of the bridge linking theOresund sound, which included timely communicationbetween different subcontractors (with different culturesand nationalities). The realisation of the annual Stock-holm Water Festivals and the Stockholm CulturalCapital project entailed timely problems that had to besolved on an impromptu basis by the front line staff.Such public events include numerous ‘micro’ incidents

570 H. Ramo / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574

Page 3: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

during which front line staff have to handle unexpectedproblems, inquire and complain without having time toconsult neither their managers nor manuals. Similarly,though less dramatic, are the enthusiasts who were behindNacka municipality’s ‘environmental team’s’ timely deci-sion to launch and implement a new and successfulconcept. Particularly one enthusiastic environmentalist,Dick Tillberg, who did not work by the book or by theclock, initiated Nacka municipality’s environmentalteam in 1992. Tillberg’s enthusiasm remained the drivingforce behind the environmental team until he resigned; afraction of the team was eventually included in the localenvironmental board.Action and communication based on right moments

to act intelligently in a unique situation are thusencouraged virtues in project organisations. However,such judgement-based decisions cannot be a basic char-acterisation of many ‘permanent’ middle-managementenvironments, such as in operating everyday technolo-gical production systems in large companies.

2. Chronological and non-chronological time

As stated in the introduction, time theories on projectorganisational settings in particular and in social sciencein general are analysed with a partisan focus on chron-ological time, may it then be depicted as clock-time,linear, circular, or spiral time. This paper is againstideas of universal symbolic languages in social settings,such as a partisan focus on clock-time. Instead, every-day practices derive their meaning in social life onlythrough the structure of social relations within whichthey come into play: in this case, in interplay betweendifferent forms of human action, organising (e.g. pro-jects), and time.The economist’s valuation of the opportunity cost of

time has become increasingly stressed, embracing almostevery aspect of human life (animals and nature). Particu-larly in management, time has become not only a tool fororganisational study, but also a means, or a commodity,to gain competitive advantages in the marketplace. Thecontrol of time has become the ultimate imperative,either in terms of cutting off yet another fraction of timein ventures undertaken, or in terms of finishing some-thing according to a strict deadline. Everyone proficientin reading a clock experience situations in which thereified clock-time runs our daily duties from place toplace. In this configuration, industrial time is not onlycentral to the way science, business, and politics con-duct their activities, but also deeply implicated in theway people in general have become progressively ‘TimeManagers’ (particularly in the western world).Situations under the influence of clock-time can be

characterised as chronos-time, a notion that has a longhistory. Already in Aristotle’s Physics [18], chronos is

defined as the ‘number of motion with respect to thebefore and the after’, which is a classical expression ofthe concept of (chronos) time as change, measure, andserial order. Therefore, despite Aristotle’s antiquatedunderstanding of physics—and a possible circularity in thedefinition—in this paper chronos is used as a definition ofan exact quantification of time (e.g. passing timeexpressed in successive readings of a clock). In terms ofmanagerial performance in project organisations, thisclock-time of chronos is the ruling factor, particularly intime management, administration, and improvement ofwhat already exists and is already known.This omnipresent characterisation of time as clock-time

(i.e. chronos-time) is, however, only one delimited way ofunderstanding time. Although being an important andinescapable aspect of modern life, the clock-time ofchronos eventually creates blinders. Analyses of the the-ory of time, and its different representations include a vastfield of philosophical studies, see, for instance Macey [19].With reference to Snow [20], there is subdivision aftersubdivision, also in studies of time, but it easily becomesmeaningless to discuss not only two theories, but also ahundred and two, or two thousand and two theories oftime. Therefore, for the sake of practicality, the earliermentioned concept of clock-time, chronos, will hereafterbe discussed together with a more timely and non-chron-ological aspect of time, namely kairos. These two conceptsof time, chronos and kairos, should not be seen as twosharply distinguished classifications, but rather as a com-plementary pair of human time concepts.The second and more obscure Greek notion of time,

kairos, and its ‘kairic’ stem is nowadays sparsely used.The words due measure, proportion and, above all, theright moment are some of the English translations ofkairos that carry ideas of wisdom and judgement intimely situations, see, for instance Kerkhoff [21], Kin-neavy [22], Kinneavy and Eskin [23], Smith [24,25],White [26]. On chronos and kairos in organisationalsettings, see, for instance Bartunek and Necochea [27],Berman Brown and Herring [28], Jaques [29], Ramo[30,31]. The present paper’s particular focus on chronos(clock-time) and kairos (timing) in project organisationsis, however, innovative and unique (as far as known).In addition to administrating according to the clock

of what already exists and is already known, all man-agers also have to seize new opportunities, in ‘windowsof opportunities’, opportunities that exist for a finiteperiod of time. Furthermore, all managers face timelysituations characterised as ‘moments of truth’, whichmight imply intelligent actions beyond the mechanicallylearned and beyond timetables. The chronological timeof chronos, whether it is described as clock-time, linear,circular, or spiral, remains inadequate in such timelysituations. Instead, the chronological time of chronos—and most notably clock-time—must be complementedby such a non-chronological notion of time as kairos.

H. Ramo / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574 571

Page 4: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

In summary, the temporal notions proposed heremake a distinction between two notions of time. Onenotion, chronos time, particularly concerns the ‘exact’quantification of passing time expressed in successivereadings of a clock. The second concept of time includesnon-chronological timely moments in which we man-ifest abilities to act intelligently and wisely at a concreteand opportune occasion, that is, kairos-time.In the next section of this paper these notions of time

are discussed in terms of the organisational aspectsof efficiency and effectiveness. A final section con-cerns a discussion about time and timing in projectorganisations.

3. Efficiency and effectiveness

Ever since Taylor’s study of manual labour in manu-facturing processes, efficiency is largely credited for therevolution in manufacturing. Concepts ranging fromTaylor’s Scientific Management to Deming’s TotalQuality Management are rooted in the basic strategy ofefficiency: to do things right according to the book and(just) in time [32]. This imperative of doing things righthas its clear logic in the creation of smooth, swift, andthrifty flows of goods and services from the supplier viathe manufacturer to the customer. To do such thingsright places great demands upon ‘exact’ clock-time,chronos. However, such ideas of efficiency and doingthings right presupposes management and improvementof what already exists and what is already known.Consequently, much evidence from the last centuryindicates that a partisan focus on efficiency tends torestrain innovativeness and awareness of changingdemand. Neither individuals nor organisations can besuccessful over time if they stick with old assumptions.The present paper therefore follows Drucker’s wellknown discussion on efficiency and effectiveness: ‘Effi-ciency is concerned with doing things right. Effectivenessis doing the right things’ [15].It is suggested here that Drucker’s discussion on the

difference between efficiency and effectiveness alsoimplies a dualism of time, where chronos’ clock-time isthe ruling factor in efficiency and kairos’ timelymoments are crucial in questions of effectiveness. Toscreen out and seize ‘windows of opportunities’ requiresa keen sense of timing. Chronos’ clock-time do notgovern such a sense of timing; instead, it is based on a‘kairic’ feeling for the right moment.This argument, that planning according to the clock is

inadequate and in need of abilities to act intelligentlyand wisely on concrete and opportune occasions isstraightforward. The question is then if it has anythingto do with project organisational settings in particular,in addition to organisational settings in general. Theanswer is yes. Management of any organisation requires

both efficiency and effectiveness, but project organisa-tions in fact bring these matters to the forefront.Some general characteristics of project organisations

are that they are ‘given, plannable and unique task(s),limited in time, complex in their implementation andsubject to evaluation’ [33]. Atkinson [34] argues that a‘finite time resource is possibly the feature which dif-ferentiates project management from most other typesof management.’ Lundin and Soderholm, on the otherhand, specify four concepts as key elements in tem-porary (project) organisations: time, task, team, andtransition [35]. These four concepts are possibly usablein the classification of any organisation, but Lundinand Soderholm argue that they are particularly rele-vant in understanding human actions in temporaryorganisations:

Permanent organizations are more naturally definedby goals (rather than tasks), survival (rather thantime), working organization (rather than team) andproduction processes and continual development(rather than transition) [36].

Herein lies hidden also a dualism between time asclock-time, chronos, and time as kairos-time; the latterform of time is implicitly emphasised as a key element inproject organisations. Drucker’s discussion on thedifference between efficiency and effectiveness, togetherwith their claimed kinship with time understood aschronos and kairos, are accentuated by the importancein project organisations to do the right things. Whereasmore permanent organisations have institutionalisedtheir job description and rules, project organisationshave to rely more on the ability to handle unexpectedincidents through improvisation. Such a sense of timingin handling incidents and opportunities is based on a‘kairic’ feeling for the right moment, which is not ruledby chronos’ clock-time.One example of the importance in project organisations

to do the right things is illustrated by the so calledSuccessive Principle, which has been used in projectmanagement, risk management, budgeting and othergeneral management situations [37]. The SuccessivePrinciple deliberately uses the idea of doing the rightthings instead of doing the things right, which means thattiming becomes a crucial complement to the strict clock-time. Following the proactive concept of SuccessivePrinciple, main elements of a given task is subjected to arough quantitative evaluation of its size of order as wellas its degree of uncertainty. Then the most importantelement is chosen to be subjected to a further specifica-tion. After a series of such successive iterations a highquality result appears, in terms of realistic budget andschedule forecasts. At a global level the concept ofSuccessive Principle has been used toward thousands ofprojects and other tasks, including several mega projects

572 H. Ramo / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574

Page 5: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

(including e.g. the 1994 Winter Olympic Games in Lil-lehammer, Norway).

4. Summary and ideas

This paper has sought to explore some (somewhatforgotten) aspects of time in project organisationpractices in which attention was directed to two notionsof chronological and non-chronological time (chronosand kairos), and two dimensions of managerial perfor-mance (efficiency and effectiveness). On the whole, thetwo types of time notions were delineated in thispaper and their underlying implications to managerialperformance in project organisations were outlined.First, the purely abstract and generally applicable

chronological clock-time of chronos was described. Theclock-time of chronos—with time expressed as infinite-simal slices—is discussed in terms of efficiency: thedecree of doing things right according to the book andconstantly working by the clock. Such ideas of efficiencyand doing things right presuppose management andimprovement of what already exists and is alreadyknown, which might be a normal situation in middle-management environments, such as in operating tech-nological production systems. However, it is suggestedthat (always) doing things right according to the bookand constantly working by the clock cannot be a basiccharacterisation of many project organisations.A second type of non-chronological time notion,

kairos time, was discussed as the ability to actintelligently and wisely on a concrete and opportuneoccasion. At such a particular moment, a ‘kairic’ feelingfor the timely can trigger bold new ideas with respect toinnovativeness and awareness of changing demand. A‘kairic’ feeling is accentuated by the importance in pro-ject organisations to do the right things at the rightmoment. Project organisations have to rely to a greatextent on the ability to handle unexpected incidents inan impromptu manner, whereas more permanentorganisations frequently have more institutionalised jobdescriptions and rules.It must be noted that to acquire a sense for such

timely ‘kairic’ moments cannot be dictated from amanual: matters of timing cannot be explored explicitly.However, the elusive character of timing (e.g. kairos)should not lead us to underestimate its importance.‘Kairic’ timing remains tacit but any able professionalhas a grasp of his or her subject far beyond the text-books; he or she knows the crucial moment for intelligentacting. Analysis of time in social settings also remainscrippled if there is a partisan focus on chronologicaltime only, regardless of whether it is depicted as clock-time, as linear, as circular, or as spiral time. However, itmust be noted that this dualistic notion of time—chronological and non-chronological (e.g. chronos and

kairos)—is not concerned with establishing what time isbut to better understand what we do with it and howtime enters into our system of values.By distinguishing between different aspects of

chronological (clock-time, linear, circular, or spiral)and non-chronological (e.g. kairos) notions of humantime, the means to understand what goes beyond thereified objectivisation of not only time but of humans aswell is provided. For instance, time management inproject organisations does not only involve mechanicalprocesses ruled by the clock. Further, the object cannotonly be to ascertain how much activity one can stuffinto 1-h or 1-day buckets. Rather, we must also payattention to the more creative aspects of time, when afeeling for the right moment to act can result in unfoldingnew and bold ideas. Anything else is a waste of time.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank three anonymous reviewersfor constructive guidance.

References

[1] Adam B. Time and social theory. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990.

[2] Adam B. Timewatch: the social analysis of time. Cambridge:

Polity Press, 1995.

[3] Bluedorn AC, Denhart RB. Time and organizations. Journal of

Management 1988;14(2):299–320.

[4] Blyton P, Hassard J, Hill S, Starkey K. Time, work and organi-

zation. London: Routledge, 1989.

[5] Burrell G. Back to the future: time and organizations. In: Reed

M, editor. Rethinking organizations: new directions in organiza-

tion theory and analysis. London: Sage, 1992.

[6] Butler R. Time in organizations: its experience, explanations and

effects. Organization Studies 1995;16(6):925–50.

[7] Clark PA. A review of theories of time and structure for organi-

zational sociology. Research in the Sociology of Organizations

1985;4:35–73.

[8] Clark PA. Chronological codes and organizational analysis. In:

Hassard J, Pym D, editors. The theory and philosophy of orga-

nizations. London: Routledge, 1990.

[9] Lee H, Liebenau J. Time in organization studies: towards a new

research direction. Organization Studies 1999;20(6):1035–58.

[10] Whipp R. A time to be concerned: a position paper on time and

management. Time & Society 1994;3(1):99–116.

[11] Zerubavel E. Patterns of time in hospital life: a sociological per-

spective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

[12] Lindkvist L, Soderlund J, Tell F. Managing product development

projects: on the significance of fountains and deadlines. Organi-

zation Studies 1998;19(6):931–51.

[13] Lundin RA, Soderholm A. A theory of the temporary organiza-

tion. Scandinavian Journal of Management 1995;11(4):437–55.

[14] Thoms F, Pinto JK. Project leadership: a question of timing.

Project Management Journal 1999;30(1):19–26.

[15] Drucker PF. Management. tasks, responsibilities, practices. Lon-

don: Heinemann, 1974.

[16] On issues of risk, trust, time, and space in the Hallandsasen ridge

railway tunnel project, see Boholm A, Lofstedt R. Issues of risk,

trust and knowledge: the Hallandsas tunnel case. Ambio 1999;

28(6):556–61.

H. Ramo / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574 573

Page 6: Doing things right and doing the right things Time and timing in projects

[17] Porsander L. Tittskap for alla. En berattelse av Lena Porsander om

hur Stockholm blev kulturhuvudstad. Goteborg: BAS, 2000 (Peep-

show for everyone. Stockholm—cultural capital of Europe 1998).

[18] Aristotle. Physics IV(11):219b.

[19] Macey SL. Encyclopedia of time. New York: Garland Publish-

ing, 1994.

[20] Snow CP. The two cultures: and a second look. An expanded

version of the two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cam-

bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959 1964.

[21] Kerkhoff M. Kairos. In: Ritter J, editor. Historische worterbuch

der philosophie Vol. IV. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftlische Buchge-

sellschaft, 1976.

[22] Kinneavy JL. Kairos: a neglected concept in classical rhetoric. In:

Moss JD, editor. Rhetoric and praxis. Washington DC: Catholic

University of America Press, 1986.

[23] Kinneavy JL, Eskin CR. Kairos in Aristotle’s rhetoric. Written

Communication 1994;11(1):131–42.

[24] Smith JE. Time, times, and the ‘right time’, chronos and kairos.

The Monist 1969;53(1):1–13.

[25] Smith JE. Time and qualitative time. Review of Metaphysics

1986;40(1):3–16.

[26] White EC. Kaironomia: on the will-to-invent. Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 1987.

[27] Bartunek JM, Necochea RA. Old insights and new times: kairos,

inca cosmology, and their contributions to contemporary manage-

ment inquiry. Journal of Management Inquiry 2000;9(2):103–12.

[28] Berman Brown R, Herring R. The circles of time. An exploratory

study in measuring temporal perceptions within organizations.

Journal of Management Psychology 1998;13(8):580–602.

[29] Jaques E. The form of time. New York: Crane Russak, 1982.

[30] Ramo H. An aristotelian human time-space manifold: from

chronochora to kairotopos. Time and Society 1999;8(2):309–28.

[31] Ramo H. Ancient ideas in a new setting. Chronos, kairos, chora,

and topos in a post-industrialized world. In: Soulsby M, Fraser

JT, editors. Time. Perspectives at the millennium. Westport: Ber-

gin & Garvey, 2000.

[32] Drucker PF. Management challenges for the 21st Century. New

York: Harper Business, 1999.

[33] Packendorff J. Inquiring into the temporary organization: new

directions for project management research. Scandinavian Jour-

nal of Management 1995;11(4):319–33.

[34] Atkinson R. Project management: cost, time and quality, two

best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success

criteria. International Journal of Project Management 1999;17(6):

337–42.

[35] Lundin RA, Soderholm A. A theory of the temporary organiza-

tion. Scandinavian Journal of Management 1995;11(4):437–55.

[36] Lundin RA, SoderholmA. A theory of the temporary organization.

Scandinavian Journal of Management 1995;11(4):437–55, p. 439.

[37] Lichtenberg S. Proactive management of uncertainty using the

successive principle. A practical way to manage opportunities and

risks. Lyngby: Polyteknisk Press, 2000.

574 H. Ramo / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 569–574