|
人们一直在以各种方式涉及全球项目管理组织早在埃及人建造金字塔或当玛雅人建立了自己的声誉，从其丰富的历史。从埃及到南部的墨西哥和中美洲，时代的政治影响了如何以一种成功的方式组织工作流程。令人惊奇的是，在远古时代，全球项目在许多大型项目中得以实施，这些项目成为影响许多其他国家或组织政治的基础。
然而，全球项目管理已成为现代社会和全球化社会的基本特征。在我看来，全球项目管理似乎是一个新的途径，带领我们走向特定的东西。基于埃及人和玛雅人的例子，我会说，在全球项目管理，政治影响我自己的项目管理情况的看法和意见，极大地影响。因此，我可以得出结论，以前稳定和永久的组织结构，帮助古代社会在其结构的管理变得越来越临时和一次性的，因为当时的政治结构。
此外，新形式的项目及其快速发展的演变导致全球之间的联系，人，组织和民族，以前是不可能的。全球项目的新时代可以扩展到不同的目标，部分原因是由于项目的影响，部分原因是全球参与。
People have been involved in various ways with the management and organization of global projects as far back as when the Egyptians built their great pyramids or when the Mayans built their reputation from their rich history. From Egypt to Southern Mexico and Central America, the politics of the times influenced how to organize the work flow in a successful manner. It is amazing how in the ancient ages global projects were implemented in many large-scale projects which became the foundation that influences many other countries or organizational politics.
Nevertheless global project management has recently become an essential feature of modern and globalized society. In my opinion, global project management seems like a new avenue that is leading us toward something specific. Based on the example of the Egyptians or the Mayans, I would say that political impact on global project management greatly influences my views and opinions in my own project management situations. I can conclude, therefore, that the previously stable and permanent organizational structures that helped the ancient societies in the management of their constructions became more and more temporary and disposable because of the political structure at that time.
Furthermore, the evolution of the new form of projects and its rapid development leads to global links between people, organizations, and nationalities that were not previously possible. The new era of global projects is expandable toward different objectives, partly because of the impact of the project and partly because of global involvement.
So far, there is no solid evidence to justify if the varieties of world view projects have any been affected either positively or negatively in the project process. Based on the virtual work environment that we have in this 21st century, however, I would say that global projects involving a diverse group of people from other countries and cultures makes many projects richer because of the mixture of world views. In project organizations that are fortunate to have this sort of diversity, there is often a more creative approach to the process of problem solving. Putting it simply, diversity increases complexity and diminishes the possibility of uncertainty and suspicion, which is often problematic with regard to group effectiveness in global projects. It is clear that where active global projects exist, political involvement from the countries impact the outcome of the results.
The purpose of this paper is to highlight how the effect of politics on global projects is crucial and how it may influence the outcome of most global projects. Throughout the paper, along with my research, I will attempt to shed more light on how global projects are impacted by political involvement and vice versa. By comparing and contrasting arguments in relation to implications of cultural and institutional differences in a global project context, I will ensure that the reader has a clear understanding of how the differences might contribute to the previously mentioned global project paradoxes.
Bruno Kreisky, chancellor of Austria since 1970, had been imprisoned more than once for his beliefs and by opposition to the totalitarian form of dictatorship. Many years later, in an interview with Richard D. Bartel, the Executive Editor of Challenge, he stated that he was a man that had made a lifelong commitment to social and economic democracy. He was of the opinion that global projects are a main issue that impacts the poverty of many of our third world countries. During the interview about the North-South development project, he made several references about how powerful mankind would be if they would all pool the necessary resources to implement the knowledge that would lead to success (Bartel, 1982).
Kreisky believed that mankind's interaction will not happen in an isolated situation. He wanted us to know that if we want to achieve global projects in a manner that can be successful; we have to know that a major issue is the effect the politics play on projects (Bartel, 1982). As many are aware, human interaction takes place in a social environment where a complex set of formal and informal values, norms, rules, codes of conduct, laws and regulations are the governor. Let's not forget the impact of policies and polities as well as a variety of organizations structures.
The primary role of culture and institutions is to reduce uncertainty and hesitation in everyday human behavior, interaction, and decision-making by providing a framework for situational interpretation and limiting options for appropriate behavior and response (Schein, 1985). Cultural interference in global project would have a positive effect on the outcome rather than a negative one because it allows people to come out of their comfort zones long enough to make decision that will be suitable to the project as a whole entity.
In my humble opinion, let's treat culture as an emergence issue that evolves in part from a social craving for answers to a set of problems common to all groups. This will lead us to the basic assumptions concerning some of the following: relationships between mankind in a socio-economic level or between mankind and nature, the differences or similarities between assumption and reality, situational realities and truths, the nature of humanity or human activity, and nature of relationships between people of the whole world (Schein 1985). It is very important to know that if we have the desire to survive and to be a society, we have to treat each project or group regardless of its size by finding solutions to the above problems. Those solutions then become distinctions that will separate global projects from each other even when there is political involvement.
Kreisky made it clear that without proper planning and a global vision, the world will be a self-centered place and we will never be self-sufficient. Nothing is impossible. According to him, his vision of the global project will be affected by the politics of the USA because he feels they are determined to reconstruct Europe after the Second World War. As a result of US involvement, he was concerned that there would be a lack of commitment from the developed countries when asked to lend a hand to the underprivileged countries. When asked if he thought this project will be realized, he replied, “For the time being, no” (Bartel, 1982).
I believe he said this because he realized that mankind was not mature enough to understand that a commitment of various people from all over the world is necessary in order for global projects to work. When asked how he thinks we could accomplish the vision that he had, he said “… we have to assist the countries of the Third World to achieve our own economic progress - except in a shorter time, without the interruption of wars. I think that there may be no real new order in the world - which is only an expression, of course, a formula - without doing what we have done in Austria, and more widely in Europe and the United States - that is to build up economic infrastructures. ” He went on to say, “I proposed quite a large-scale program for the accelerated development of the infrastructure of developing countries” (Bartel, 1982).
In my cultural awareness class, we have reviewed studies that demonstrate that individuals and groups have a tendency to form cultures that can be gathered and analyzed according to boundaries set by nation-states, culture and diversity. Most companies have politics that are good for them and they implement them to improve productivity, protection of the company assets, regulation of the work place rules, and in some cases the dress code and other attributes that help secure a safe environment. My argument underlines the influence of politics in global project management and its descendant as a real difference between national cultures that exist, and each national culture sets of partly differing solutions to the previously mentioned universal-socio problems. In my opinion, these have evolved over time developing a higher degree of dependability and flexibility.
“Securing food production and increasing energy supply are two of the most important sectors in their infrastructure. They also have transportation problems to be solved. To solve them by air is too expensive; to solve them with cars or trucks requires much skilled labor and oil is very expensive. What we need are railway systems to transport people and goods on the Third World,” said Kreisky (Bartel, 1982). His approach will encourage nations to work together on a multi- lateral way to coordinate global projects, but the politics of each nation may continue to be a barricade to the success of a project of this magnitude.#p#分页标题#e#
Taking a look at other global projects that may be influenced by political involvement, when it comes to the automotive market, Asia is the world's number one market for growth. This requires political involvement that will allow the flow of merchandise and the exchange of technology so the companies may advance in a positive way. One may wonder how it will be possible if the world leaders influence their nations by the way they elect the governing bodies of their countries. People that are part of this growing market already have values which influence their purchasing habits. Asian automotive manufacturers will make sure that their governments influence the market in a way that will be profitable to them by controlling such things as regulations, cultural purchase influences, etc… (McClellan, 2002).
In the article Global Politics Shift Auto Industry Focus, we realized the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regions, are becoming more unified through their trade pacts. China has been taken the boldest step, by becoming fully integrated into the global economy through its membership in the World Trade Organization (WHO). Japan, the world's second largest automobile market, is perhaps the worst off of the industrialized nations. In September Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi fired his entire cabinet; some of the people in his country were against him because he had failed to fix the economy as he had promised. According to this article, such moves have done little to inspire consumer confidence. The government in each country has some effect on the policies that govern the global project. In my opinion, governments have to be open to positive ideologies that will improve the development of various global projects. Moves such as these will help enhance the maturity of mankind's relationship on a worldwide level (McClellan, 2002).
Closely inter-twined and emanating from culture is the concept of institutions. They consist of informal rules such as sanctions, taboos, customs, traditions, and codes of conduct, and formal rules like constitutions, laws, and property rights. According to North, the major role of institutions in a society is to establish a stable (but not necessarily efficient) structure to be successful globally in projects that involve political, economic and social interaction (North 1990, 1991). Obviously, the basis of these concepts and the difference between culture and institutions is unmistakable and may not always be clear for some.
In either the case of large or small global projects there are literally so many factors that may affect the result or outcome of the success of the project. In order to simplify examination these factors can be categorized into various groups such as client related factors, management related factors, and project context and environmental related factors. It can be assumed that there will be an emergence outcome from the cultural and institutional differences from the context for these factors. I will also argue that the outcome and implications to global projects become noticeable if they are studied in specific events in a given project. The effects of politics on global projects are a major issue with the growth of virtual teams. There can often be conflict when people with different backgrounds and belief systems work in the same place, or on the same global project. Political involvement can prevent this from happening at times, and make it worse at others. The influence of politics in the location where the project is been accomplished will affect the outcome of the project in general and the ability of the project members performance in particular.
As many of us know, in every project management situation any project can consist of numerous parallel and sequential events. These events can roughly be distinguished according to the different stages of the project. Engwall has described the general project stages in three steps: the outcome formulation, the project execution and the outcome assessment (Engwall, 2002).
It is clear that observations from my study illustrate some implications of cultural differences, which are driven by local politics, in many stages of a global project. If this is true, the implications can lead to unclear goals, vague assignments and misunderstandings among participants of the same project. In this last point (misunderstandings among participants), attention must be directed to situations where there may be lack of coordinating by the group, poor scheduling, weak tolerance of failures, problems of emotional integration as well as divisions between trusted allies and foreign partners . Any confusion like this will be easily noticeable and can create a lack of cohesion in the group as well as mismanagement. If local politics are very lacking and it is noticeable, it can lead to an obvious failure of the project. This may lead to different conceptions of work ethics, quality of the work, time management, costs or savings, and success or failure of the project.
Consequently, one could argue that effects of politics on global projects lead to cultural and institutional differences - which can impact the full growth of the global project team in many ways. By working together as a member of part of the project without borders or social discriminations, use of diversity as a tool will empower each member without fear of losing face or leadership capacities. By managing project efficiency in a global vision and being able to come out of our comfort zone for the sake of our success, we are able to use the politics of the government or the situation to help us reach our goals.
Nevertheless, it is important to notice whether or not and under what kind of circumstances these differences will affect the outcome of our project. It is imperative to have the ability to evaluate the aftermath of these differences in global projects. In general, it might be assumed that in a specific situation the outcome of inter-action between different politics, policies and cultures depends on a focus of power and the capacity to use it. For that reason, it is very important to focus our attention on specific events in any given global project, to differentiate the focus of power between the members in these events as well as the circumstances under which the relevant party is able and motivated to use that power.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
