Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Lehtonen, Markku (2014)
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: JA, H1
Evaluation literature has paid relatively little attention to the specific needs of evaluating large, complex industrial and infrastructure projects, often called ‘megaprojects’. The abundant megaproject governance literature, in turn, has largely focused on the so-called ‘megaproject pathologies’, i.e. the chronic budget overruns, and failure of such projects to keep to timetables and deliver the expected social and economic benefits. This article draws on these two strands of literature, identifies shortcomings, and suggests potential pathways towards an improved evaluation of megaprojects. To counterbalance the current overemphasis on relatively narrowly defined accountability as the main function of megaproject evaluation, and the narrow definition of project success in megaproject evaluation, the article argues that conceptualizing megaprojects as dynamic and evolving networks would provide a useful basis for the design of an evaluation approach better able to promote learning and to address the socio economic aspects of megaprojects. A modified version of ‘network mapping’ is suggested as a possible framework for megaproject evaluation, with the exploration of the multiple accountability relationships as a central evaluation task, designed to reconcile learning and accountability as the central evaluation functions. The article highlights the role of evaluation as an ‘emergent’ property of spontaneous megaproject ‘governing’, and explores the challenges that this poses to the role of the evaluator.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Flyvbjerg  B  (2011)  Over  budget,  over  time,  over  and  over  again:  Managing  major  projects. In: Morris PWG, Pinto JK and Söderlund J (eds) The Oxford Handbook of  Project Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 321‐344. 
    • Wachs  M  (1989)  When  Planners  Lie  with  Numbers.  Journal  of  the  American  Planning Association 55(4): 476‐479. 
    • van  Marrewijk  A,  Clegg  SR,  Pitsis  TS  and  Veenswijk  M  (2008)  Managing  publicprivate  megaprojects:  Paradoxes,  complexity,  and  project  design.  International  Journal  of  Project  Management  26(6):  591‐600. 
    • van  Marrewijk  A  and  Veenswijk  M  (2010)  Organizing  reflexivity  in  designed  change:  the  ethnoventionist  approach.  Journal  of  Organizational  Change  Management 23(3): 212‐229. 
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article