IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00658346.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The strategy of parallel approaches in projects with unforeseeable uncertainty: the Manhattan case in retrospect

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvain Lenfle

    (CRG - Centre de recherche en gestion - X - École polytechnique - IP Paris - Institut Polytechnique de Paris - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UCP - Université de Cergy Pontoise - Université Paris-Seine)

Abstract

This paper discusses the literature on the management of projects with unforeseeable uncertainty. Recent work demonstrates that, when confronted with unforeseeable uncertainties, managers can adopt either a learning, trial-and-error-based strategy, or a parallel approach. In the latter, different solutions are developed in parallel and the best one is chosen when enough information becomes available. Studying the case of the Manhattan Project, which historically exemplifies the power of the parallel approach, has lead us to show that the either/or logic underlying the existing literature on the parallel approach oversimplifies the question. The Manhattan case demonstrates that managers must not necessarily choose between solutions, but can also combine them or add new ones during the project.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvain Lenfle, 2011. "The strategy of parallel approaches in projects with unforeseeable uncertainty: the Manhattan case in retrospect," Post-Print hal-00658346, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00658346
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00658346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00658346/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christoph H. Loch & Christian Terwiesch & Stefan Thomke, 2001. "Parallel and Sequential Testing of Design Alternatives," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 663-678, May.
    2. Paul S. Adler & David Obstfeld, 2007. "The role of affect in creative projects and exploratory search," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(1), pages 19-50, February.
    3. Alfred Kieser, 1994. "Why Organization Theory Needs Historical Analyses—And How This Should Be Performed," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 608-620, November.
    4. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, April.
    5. Svenja C. Sommer & Christoph H. Loch, 2004. "Selectionism and Learning in Projects with Complexity and Unforeseeable Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1334-1347, October.
    6. Langlois, Richard N. & Robertson, Paul L., 1992. "Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 297-313, August.
    7. Sylvain Lenfle, 2008. "Exploration and Project Management," Post-Print hal-00404168, HAL.
    8. William J. Abernathy & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 1969. "Parallel Strategies in Development Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(10), pages 486-505, June.
    9. Burton Klein & William Meckling, 1958. "Application of Operations Research to Development Decisions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 352-363, June.
    10. Michael T. Pich & Christoph H. Loch & Arnoud De Meyer, 2002. "On Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Complexity in Project Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1008-1023, August.
    11. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    12. Isabelle Huault & V. Perret & S. Charreire-Petit, 2007. "Management," Post-Print halshs-00337676, HAL.
    13. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, April.
    14. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    15. Eduardo S. Schwartz & Lenos Trigeorgis (ed.), 2004. "Real Options and Investment under Uncertainty: Classical Readings and Recent Contributions," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262693186, April.
    16. Arnd Huchzermeier & Christoph H. Loch, 2001. "Project Management Under Risk: Using the Real Options Approach to Evaluate Flexibility in R...D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 85-101, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Gillier & Sophie Hooge & Gérald Piat, 2013. "Framing the scope of value in exploratory projects: An expansive value management model," Post-Print hal-00824354, HAL.
    2. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    3. Aga, Deribe Assefa, 2016. "Factors affecting the success of development projects : A behavioral perspective," Other publications TiSEM 867ae95e-d53d-4a68-ad46-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. repec:hal:gemwpa:hal-00824354 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Luz Stella Cardona-Meza & Gerard Olivar-Tost, 2017. "Modeling and Simulation of Project Management through the PMBOK® Standard Using Complex Networks," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-12, December.
    6. Lenfle, Sylvain & Söderlund, Jonas, 2022. "Project-oriented agency and regeneration in socio-technical transition: Insights from the case of numerical weather prediction (1978–2015)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    7. Pascal Le Masson & Sylvain Lenfle & Benoit Weil, 2013. "Testing whether major innovation capabilities are systemic design capabilities: analyzing rule-renewal design capabilities in a case-control study of historical new business developments," Post-Print hal-00881700, HAL.
    8. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2019. "Inventions and Scientific Discoveries: Impact of Designers’ Collaborations on Creativity. An Analysis Towards Fixation Effects," Post-Print hal-02262242, HAL.
    9. Thomas Gillier & Sophie Hooge & Gérald Piat, 2013. "Framing the scope of value in exploratory projects: An expansive value management model," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00824354, HAL.
    10. Sylvain Lenfle & Christoph Loch, 2017. "Has Megaproject management lost its way ? Lessons from History," Post-Print hal-03640779, HAL.
    11. Gilles Garel, 2022. "Innovation and Covid-19: time pacing of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine project [Innovation et Covid-19 : de la vitesse de développement du vaccin Pfizer/BioNTech]," Post-Print hal-03584682, HAL.
    12. Akin Osman Kazakçi, 2013. "On the imaginative constructivist nature of design: a theoretical approach," Post-Print hal-00982964, HAL.
    13. Akin Osman Kazakçi, 2012. "On the imaginative constructivist nature of design: a theoretical approach," Post-Print hal-00770648, HAL.
    14. Creemers, Stefan & De Reyck, Bert & Leus, Roel, 2015. "Project planning with alternative technologies in uncertain environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 465-476.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    2. Baldwin, Carliss & MacCormack, Alan & Rusnak, John, 2014. "Hidden structure: Using network methods to map system architecture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1381-1397.
    3. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Javad Nasiry, 2020. "Organizational Structure, Subsystem Interaction Pattern, and Misalignments in Complex NPD Projects," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(1), pages 214-231, January.
    4. Manuel E. Sosa & Jürgen Mihm & Tyson R. Browning, 2013. "Linking Cyclicality and Product Quality," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 473-491, July.
    5. Tian Heong Chan & Shi-Ying Lim, 2023. "The Emergence of Novel Product Uses: An Investigation of Exaptations in IKEA Hacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2870-2892, May.
    6. Glenn Hoetker & Anand Swaminathan & Will Mitchell, 2007. "Modularity and the Impact of Buyer-Supplier Relationships on the Survival of Suppliers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 178-191, February.
    7. MacCormack, Alan & Baldwin, Carliss & Rusnak, John, 2012. "Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1309-1324.
    8. Vincent Frigant & Damien Talbot, 2003. "Convergence et diversité du passage à la production modulaire dans l'aéronautique et l'automobile en Europe," Post-Print hal-00246171, HAL.
    9. Vincent Frigant & Damien Talbot, 2007. "Proximites Et Logique Modulaire Dans L'Automobile Et L'Aeronautique : Vers Une Dualisation Des Espaces D'Approvisionnement," Post-Print hal-02376436, HAL.
    10. Sylvain Lenfle, 2018. "Projects, Agency and the Multi-Level Perspective: Insights from Numerical Weather Prediction," Post-Print hal-03640771, HAL.
    11. Simge Tuna & Stefano Brusoni & Anja Schulze, 2019. "Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 977-1009.
    12. Damien Talbot, 2018. "L’industrie aéronautique civile européenne : vers une banalisation ?," Post-Print halshs-02007393, HAL.
    13. Vincent Frigant & Damien Talbot, 2005. "Technological Determinism and Modularity: Lessons from a Comparison between Aircraft and Auto Industries in Europe," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 337-355.
    14. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    15. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    16. Fujita, Mai, 2013. "The Japanese and Chinese models of industrial organisation : fighting for supremacy in the Vietnamese motorcycle industry," IDE Discussion Papers 420, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    17. Sophie Hooge & Cédric Dalmasso, 2015. "Dynamics of internal R&D stakeholders in the Fuzzy Front-End of breakthrough engineering projects," Post-Print hal-01202541, HAL.
    18. Stefano Brusoni & Keith Pavitt, 2003. "Problem solving and the co-ordination of innovative activities," SPRU Working Paper Series 93, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Fabrizio Salvador & Juan Pablo Madiedo, 2021. "Enabling Globally Distributed Projects: Effects of Project Interface Match and Related Technical Experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(4), pages 1052-1081, April.
    20. Kartik Kalaignanam & Tarun Kushwaha & Anand Nair, 2017. "The Product Quality Impact of Aligning Buyer-Supplier Network Structure and Product Architecture: an Empirical Investigation in the Automobile Industry," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Manhattan Project; Project Management; Parallel Approach; Combination; Unforeseeable uncertainty; Innovation; Manhattan Project.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00658346. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.