Development Arena in Project Management
Contents |
Abstract
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, actor-network theory (ANT) [1] was developed by the philosopher and anthropologist Bruno Latour, as an independent approach to the study of science, technology, and society. Since then, several different frameworks have been developed, based on Bruno Latour's actor-network theory, among these the development arena by Jørgensen and Sørensen 1999, which will be the focus area of this article.
The development arena is an analytical framework that can be used as a tool to understand and analyze processes in which companies and other actors try to influence and control technologies, products, and markets [2]. Under the auspices of project management, the framework is firstly a unique tool to map the complex network, that the project team enters when working on a new project. By analyzing the development arena and its four elements; concerns, elements, locations, and translations, the project team must strive to identify where change can be enabled and how a reconstruction across relationships in the network can be made possible in the arena in order to create the desired change for the project.
This article will provide an insight into what defines a development arena, what elements the arena consists of, and finally how this framework can be used as a tool within management and more specifically its relation to project, program, and portfolio management.
Introduction
As mentioned earlier, the concept of Develop Arena takes its most important theoretical inspiration from Bruno Latour, Michel Callon and John Law’s community of ideas – especially Actor-network theory (Jørgensen, 2012). We know ANT as a theory that can be helpful in the description and understanding of complex, heterogeneous networks, in which both human and non-human actors are involved. These actors are described in the network through the relationships they are part of. Unlike actor-network theory, the concept of development arena focuses rather on how development and change can be created in the network by inviting new actors into the arena and thereby reconfiguring the network. It can be argued that the Arena concept is a response to a need for an improved theory that deals more with transition processes in project management (Jørgensen, 2012).
Another important difference between the two concepts is that the Arena concept adds a “spatial dimension” to the theory. This spatial dimension must be understood as a delimitation or division of the network - i.e., the network is divided into different spaces in which different actors interact (Jørgensen, 2012). We can now add another concept that better describes these boundaries and spaces in the network - namely "actor-worlds", developed by Callon in 1986. An actor-world is described by Jørgensen (2012), as; "An actor-world is developed around a certain set of situations and is thereby limited to what we here call a location in the space of a development arena." (Jørgensen, 2012). Therefore, the Development Arena and the actor-worlds are strongly connected since the actor-world defines and identify different actions that take place in the network.
Finally, it is important to point out that development arenas are constantly evolving and changing, due to the continuous development in society, which the term itself also insinuates;
“The word ‘arena’ comes from Arabic. It refers to sand both as the ground for activities and as the never settled character of this ground and its place - it is moving and the ground is thus eternally reshaped (Fink, 1996).”(Jørgensen, 2012)
So even though the actual mapping of the arena is static when you make it, you must understand that it is still changing and therefore dynamic.
In the following section, the development arena, and the various parts it consists of will be described in more detail.
Development Arenas and actor worlds
- How to understand the framework and how not to
- Challenges of using the method in practice
Concerns
- Definition
Elements
- Definition
Locations
- Definition
Translation
- Definition
Development arena as a project management tool
- How can it be used in a project?
- How can it be used as a project management tool/boundary object?
- Illustration of a model
- Case/Example
Conclusion
- Conlusion
References
- ↑ Callon, M. (1986). Sociologi of an Actor-Network - Michel Callon.pdf.
- ↑ Jørgensen, U., & Sørensen, O. H. (1999). Arenas of development - A space populated by actor-worlds, artefacts, and surprises. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 11(3), 409–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/095373299107438
- ↑ Callon, M. (2017). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of Saint-Brieuc Bay. Logos (Russian Federation), 27(2), 49–94. https://doi.org/10.22394/0869-5377-2017-2-49-9
- ↑ Latour, B. (1990). Technology is Society Made Durable. In The Sociological Review (Vol. 38, Issue 1_suppl, pp. 103–131). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03350.x
- ↑ Sovacool, B. K., & Hess, D. J. (2017). Ordering theories: Typologies and conceptual frameworks for sociotechnical change. Social Studies of Science, 47(5), 703–750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717709363
