This document discusses relational capabilities in projects. It defines relational capabilities as routines that support exchange and interaction, which are the basis for other project capabilities. The study aims to identify which relational activities at the micro level become routinized into relational capabilities. Using qualitative comparative analysis of 17 healthcare innovation projects, the study finds that three relational components - realization capability, access to opportunity, and assessment capability - were routinized by four repeatable activities: alignment of interests, contact with key market people, prior experience, and exchange of ideas. The identification of routinely formed activities enhances understanding of how capabilities are developed in projects.

1. Relational Capabilities in Projects
Maria Kapsali
Umeå School of Business and Economics

2. What is a Relational Capability
• Relational capabilities (the set of routines that support
exchange and interaction)
• They are the basis for other project capabilities (e.g.
learning, knowledge management, product development)
• Depend on the routinization of relational activities (formal,
informal communication, negotiation, exchange of ideas,
aligning interests etc. more on appendix)

3. The problem
•
The gap: we do not know which relational activities at the micro level get
routinized and become significant to build relational capabilities
– Routines have been difficult to measure since we did not have analytical
tools to find complicated combinations of activities
•
The question: which relational activities become routinized into relational
capabilities
•
The contribution: This study shows how empirical research using
qualitative comparative analysis can measure systematic and valid patterns
of routines at the micro level, an area of research that is significantly weak
in both the strategy and the project literatures. The identification and
explanation of routine formation will enhance the theoretical
conceptualization of capabilities and explain their use in the practice of
project management.

4. What we know
•
Main themes in previous studies: learning, network ties, trust, culture,
participation-dominance, consent-negotiation, network characteristics,
stability, reflexivity and hierarchy
– Relationships are important to develop project capabilities (learning and
knowledge)
– Relational competence and interaction processes in intra or interorganizational relationships, client-contractor relations, learning processes
and stakeholder interaction
– Intra-organizational networks focus on supply relations to create a
competitive advantage (more embedded less ephemeral)
– Inter-organizational networks show how projects become relational
‘bridges’ across networks of organizations (lack a hierarchical structure
and activities span across boundaries and rely on trust and opportunism)
– Weak ties in projects rely on segment pools and the exercise of controlled
redundancy

5. The method
• Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a configurational set
theoretic method to measure the combination of activities within
relational routines that is significant
• Used in strategic management research to explain the complex
interdependencies between industrial, corporate and business-unit
attributes that underlie business performance (Greckhamer et al.,
2008)
• QCA is used here to investigate which (combinations of ) relational
activities are significantly routinized to become relational capabilities
• 17 multiple cases, based on healthcare innovation consortium projects
funded by the EU FP program, based on interviews with project
managers and participants, project reports and evaluations

6. The metrics: measuring routinization of relational
activities
•
6 groups of relational activities (or components): Realisation Capability,
Assessment Capability , Access to knowledge, Access to opportunity, CoAdaptation, Co-Innovation (13 relational activities included in all)
•
5 routine properties: Measure regularity- variation- recurrence and
uncertainty
– Purposeful planned goal led interaction with a clear agenda
– Scaffold or emergent feedback– judgment led interaction
– Frequency of repetition of action-sequences become pre-planned and
automatic
– Frequency of interruptions Contingencies Changes pervasive uncertainty
– interactional principles are uncertain and need to be discovered novelty
(definitions in appendix)

7. Result
Relational capability
components
Realization capability
Assessment capability
No of
projects
10
16
Activities
MARKET
PRIOREX
No of
projects
9
14
Access to opportunity
9
ALIGN
IDEAS
11
9
Co-adaptation
9
ADJUST
DESIGN
3
8
Configurations
purpose*repetition*novel*situatedact
purpose*repetition*~interrupt*situatedact
purpose*repetition*~novel*situatedact
purpose*repetition*~interrupt*situatedact
purpose*repetition*~interrupt*~novel*sit
uatedact
purpose*repetition*~interrupt*situatedact
purpose*repetition*~interrupt*situatedact
Consist
ency
1
1
1
1
1
Cover
age
0.44
0.78
0.71
0.72
0.66
1
1
0.75
0.5
Finding: three out of the six relational components (realization, access to
opportunity and assessment capability, whilst the co-adaptation component was
borderline) were routinized by four significantly repeatable activities (alignment of
interests, contact with key market people, prior experience and exchange of ideas) out
of the 13 mentioned in theory

8. Conclusion
•
The gap: we do not know which relational activities at the micro level get
routinized and become significant to build relational capabilities
– Routines have been difficult to measure since we did not have analytical
tools to find complicated combinations between activities
•
The question: which relational activities become routinized into relational
capabilities
•
Finding: three out of the six relational components (realization, access to
opportunity and assessment capability, whilst the co-adaptation component
was borderline) were routinized by four significantly repeatable activities
(alignment of interests, contact with key market people, prior experience
and exchange of ideas) out of the 13 mentioned in theory

9. Conclusion
•
In contrast to prior studies, projects do not need long-term learning and
trust to develop relational routines into capabilities, but instead
these four activities were systematically planned within an expedient
turnaround of problem solving cycles, where they exchange ideas, exploit
market relations, adapt processes and co-design approaching tasks as
problems
•
If you have a large project with a diverse stakeholders you would benefit from
planning problem solving cycles where people focus on tasks as problems and
use alignment of interests, contact with key market people, prior experience and
exchange of ideas to exploit their interaction

10. Thank you
Any questions
Appendix

11. Definitions of relational components and activities
Capability
Explanation of capability
component
component
Realisation The ability to map out and realise
Capability
business-to-business networks that
could enhance marketing
CODES of
activities
MARKET
Explanation of routine activities
Interaction with key contacts in markets for funds,
resources and marketing
SHAPE
Interaction with owners, decision makers and
politicians to influence regulation
Assessmen The ability to proactively manage
PRIOREXP
The selection of partners on the basis of past
t
networks to allocate time based on
experience
Capability
usefulness; strengthen worthwhile
Alliance function manuals, personnel and assets
bonds; realise the benefit of weak
ALIGN
Alignment of goals and interests between partners
ties; and expand their networks
DISPUTE
Activities for dispute resolution, arbitration or
Hierarchical, epistemic and
renegotiations
communities of practice
INV
The level of investment- resource or otherwise – to
make it work
Access to
The ability to generate, integrate and KNOWLEDGES The level of sharing of information and knowledge
knowledge utilise knowledge from network flows HARE
between partners – Interfirm knowledge-sharing
emerges as a distinctive marketing
routines
oriented relational capability
KNOWLEDGE The levels where people exploit the overlap of skills and
OVERLAP
knowledge
Open learning and knowledge transfer
Access to
The ability to extract and exploit
IDEAS
Improve the exchange process
opportunit opportunities in a network
y
CoThe ability to proactively adapt
ADJUST
Mutual adjustment – Change habits and develop skills
Adaptation products and services through
to fit the situation task and relation
interaction
DESIGN
Adapt and change according to customer requirements
CoThe ability to tap into the pools of
COSPECIALIZ Embeddedness of partners’ specialization – mutual
Innovation technologies and human resources in E
learning
order to jointly innovate
COMPLEMENT The extent to which partners use their skills in a
complementary fashion