Successfully reported this slideshow.
Upcoming SlideShare
×

# Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to measure contract rules in complex project operations -poms 2013

1,446 views

Published on

research conference presentation in project management

Published in: Education, Technology
• Full Name
Comment goes here.

Are you sure you want to Yes No
• I like this service ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ from Academic Writers. I don't have enough time write it by myself.

Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
• Very nice tips on this. In case you need help on any kind of academic writing visit our website HelpWriting.net and place your order

Are you sure you want to  Yes  No

### Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to measure contract rules in complex project operations -poms 2013

1. 1. Maria Kapsali & Jens Roehrich 043-0183 Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to measure contract rules in complex project operations
2. 2. Abstract How to use analytic induction and fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) To measure the effectiveness of contract rules in complex program operations fsQCA is useful to simultaneously explore deductively causal complexity of variable configurations in complex operations and exploit the richness of in-depth qualitative data
3. 3. • We seek causal pathways to the same outcome, which may be achieved in different combinations of conditions, and that causation must be understood in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions • Complex causal connections (causal complexity) are analysed using Boolean logic to explain pathways to a particular outcome. Complex and multiple patterns of causation may be explored – statistical techniques assume that social phenomena are driven by unifinality, additivity, and symmetry, therefore it is difficult to model equifinal, conjunctural and asymmetric set relations in terms of sufficiency and necessity (Fiss, 2007: 1190) – qualitative (written and especially verbal) data formulations are largely set theoretic in nature (Fiss, 2007; Ragin 1987, 2009) we need to study cases inductively as configurations and not as independent, analytically separate settings to acquire measurements from
4. 4. Why fsQCA (2) • Qualitative comparative analysis has the advantage that it may not require as many cases as a case survey. comparative research designs involve small and intermediate-size Ns (e.g., 5-50), but this range of cases is often too large for in-depth case analysis to retain patterns (analysis becomes too complicated), but also too few for conventional statistical techniques • It can be used with previously conducted studies as well as with new studies, and thus encourages an evolutionary and integrative approach to knowledge creation. It allows easy integration of both qualitative and quantitative forms of evidence, and is transparent and systematic • ‘fuzzy’ logic is a recent refinement of QCA so that it is not necessary to dichotomise variables so precisely and allows for more variation in set theoretic membership (continuous instead of binary) • Used in : sociology, psychology, political science and history
5. 5. example Research design Research Question Which are the contract rules that successfully elicit compliant behaviour in programs? Methodology Retroduction based on Critical Realism (Downward, 2008: 314) Purpose Measure the characteristics of a social phenomenon Find generalized patterns of complex causality to develop theory and assert plausible contextualized explanations Instrumentation Qualitative multiple case studies (N=23) Data 120 in-depth, semi-structured interviews and 23 project contracts/evaluation reports Analysis (configurational) analysis of multiple conjuctural causality through fuzzy-set analysis (Ragin, 2008)
6. 6. Contracting theories Type of studies Focus of studies Result Classical deductive modularity in contract structures incomplete Neo-Classical inductive arbitration, collaboration incomplete Relational trust, commitment, reputation, networks, relational ties etc incomplete combinations of factors, both modular and relational, into the causal mechanisms between rules and outcomes ? inductive Middle-way ? retroductive Our aim: the middle way – systemic contract
7. 7. High level of complexity in transactions Diverse, autonomous actors with mixed interdependencies and timings Really unpredictable relations Mediation for conflict Long- term diverse relations Relational networks, trust, commitment irrational incentives Medium Stable short- term relations Rational incentives Easy prediction of behaviour Low Classical contracts Neo-classical + Relational contracts Middle way contracts ‘our study’
8. 8. Fuzzy-set qualitative analysis in multiple case studies 1. Contract rules Classify rules Identify conditions and outcomes Build an analytic frame 2. Analysis Anchors, and thresholds 3. Interpretation of configurations 4.Conclusion Content analysis of case studies to assign values to conditions and outcomes Build truth table and retrieve configurations from the software Explain causal complexity between the conditions Look again into the cases (consistency and coverage) Compare and explain the configurations Suggest which are the successful results Select configurations with the highest significance (consistencycoverage) Minimize configurations Build a conceptual model
9. 9. Classification of conditions – inductive approach for selecting Amenta and Poulsen (1994) and Yamasaki and Rihoux (2009) Linkage control rules to prevent opportunism Practical decision rules for generating all possible control responses Emancipatory autonomy rules formalization of action accountability rewards incentives obligations penalties - punishment exclusion fragmentation in supply chain standardization of tasks communication at the interfaces co-decision processes formal meetings, boards, panels, conferences evaluation, feedback loops overlap and sharing complement of skills negotiations regarding the definition of the goal, planning, monitoring and executing participation of users Rules that empower to selfregulate and self-organize knowledge creation coupling and interdependence adjust processes and habits leverage for change The rules in the contracts categorized into three conditions (Smith, 2006)
10. 10. The analytic frame (conditions and outcomes) and with the fsQCA measure scale Analytic frame Conditions Outcomes Linkage rules Compliant (1) * Mostly compliant (0.75) Practical rules Ambiguous (0.50) * Insufficiently compliant (0.25) Emancipatory rules Non-compliant (0) fsQCA anchors 0 Not significant 0.25 0.50 0.75 less significant cross-over point mostly significant the point of maximum ambiguity 1 highly significant
11. 11. Program PPP (6 projects) Nature Highly complex Duration Up to 30 years Description Multiple national projects for the construction of healthcare facilities Contract type Outcome Based non-standard contract Contract structure Highly complex IST/eTEN (14 projects) Medium to highly complex 18-36 months Multiple transnational projects for the creation and deployment of telemedicine Performance Based contract - Classical Medium to highly Complex EARSS (3 projects) Simple 6 years Multiple national projects for the creation of a European ICT epidemiology network Memorandum of agreement Highly relational – minimum critical specifications Simple
12. 12. Linkage EARSS IST eTEN PPP 0.75 0.75 0.5 1 0.75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.5 Practical 0.75 0.25 0.75 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 1 0.75 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.75 Emancipatory Outcome 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.75 0 0.25 0.25 0 0.25 0.25 1 0.5 1 0.75 1 0.25 0.75 0 0.25 0 1 0.75 0.5 0 1 0.25 0 0.25 0 1 0.5 1 0.75 Truth Table with the values of each condition for each project