The Giza Pyramid : learning from this megaproject Procter, CT and Kozak-Holland, MP http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMH-11-2018-0061 Title The Giza Pyramid : learning from this megaproject Authors Procter, CT and Kozak-Holland, MP Type Article URL This version is available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/51221/ Published Date 2019 USIR is a digital collection of the research output of the University of Salford. Where copyright permits, full text material held in the repository is made freely available online and can be read, downloaded and copied for non-commercial private study or research purposes. Please check the manuscript for any further copyright restrictions. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. Journal of Management History Journal of Management History The Giza Pyramid: learning from this megaproject Journal: Journal of Management History Manuscript ID JMH-11-2018-0061.R1 Manuscript Type: Research Paper Megaproject, Giza pyramid project, Project management history, “Break- Keywords: fix model" of megaproject management, Case study http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jmh Page 1 of 21 Journal of Management History 1 2 3 4 The Giza Pyramid: learning from this megaproject 5 6 Abstract 7 8 Purpose 9 This paperJournal demonstrates the of contemporary Management relevance of the management History of the Great Pyramid of Giza 10 project. 11 12 Design/methodology/approach 13 14 The paper uses evidence from the literature from many disciplines concerning both the objectives and 15 construction of the pyramid. It relates this to recent discussion concerned with the issues faced in 16 megaproject management which are core to discussion of success and failure. 17 18 19 Findings 20 The analysis shows the significance of the "break-fix model" of megaproject management and how 21 having a sequence of megaprojects builds management through a learning process. It demonstrates the 22 significance of innovation arising from the experience of previous projects in solving major technical 23 challenges and illustrates the importance of the organisation and ethical management of a substantial 24 25 workforce. 26 Research & practical limitations/implications 27 28 29 There is very limited reliable documentary evidence from the time of the construction of Giza (c 2560 30 BCE). Many sources concerning ancient Egypt are still widely contested. However, the use of research 31 from a combination of disciplines demonstrates the relevance of the project and the importance of 32 learning from history to contemporary project management. 33 34 35 Originality/value 36 37 We believe this is the first paper to analyse the Giza pyramid project from a project management 38 perspective. This was arguably the most significant construction project of ancient history, and the 39 paper explains the lessons which can be learnt which are very significant to today’s megaprojects. 40 41 Keywords: Project management history, megaproject, case study, “break-fix model" of megaproject 42 43 management, Giza pyramid project. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 1 59 60 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jmh Journal of Management History Page 2 of 21 1 2 3 1) Introduction 4 5 Flyvbjerg (2014) defines megaprojects as “large-scale, complex ventures that typically costs US $1 billion 6 or more”. Using this definition, he suggested that megaprojects account for 8% of the world’s GDP. This 7 figure is rising. In citing this work Söderlund et al (Söderlund, Sankaran and Biesenthal, 2018) refer to 8 the work of Thomas Frey in predicting that within the next decade megaprojects will increase to 24% of 9 Journal of Management History 10 the world’s GDP. In future we will most probably be talking about terraprojects, i.e. projects with a cost 11 exceeding $1,000 billion, for example to tackle substantial global issues such as climate change. 12 13 Such projects, however, do not enjoy a successful track record if measured by traditional criteria. 14 Flyvbjerg’s paper estimates that just 10% of these projects are completed within budget, 10% within 15 time and 10% realise the benefits of their business case. We must at the outset acknowledge that there 16 are other criteria by which success can be measured, which are arguably more significant (for example 17 long term benefit to stakeholders). Furthermore, there are many reasons for the initiation of 18 19 megaprojects beyond their practical use value. Flyvbjerg famously talks about the ‘four sublimes at 20 play’, possibly most significant of which is the ‘political sublime’ conferring immortality on the project 21 sponsor. Nevertheless, by any criteria, megaprojects have a very poor record and are typically 22 characterized by what Flyvbjerg refers to as the “Break-Fix” model of megaproject management. The 23 project commences and then becomes broken in a fundamental way. At this stage it is either abandoned 24 25 or it is fixed, typically by adding substantial additional resources and time and possibly also by altering 26 the specification. Flyvbjerg suggests that there are 10 characteristics of megaprojects which contribute 27 to this failure – a theme that has been taken up more broadly in the literature (Söderlund 2018). These 28 characteristics are discussed in section 6. 29 30 There is clear common ground between Flyvbjerg’s analysis of megaprojects and Morris’s argument 31 (2013) for the development of theory in project management. Morris argues: 32 33 “...in the early 1970s … the discipline [project management], as it had now clearly become, 34 began to be seriously affected by social, economic, political, and environmental issues... The 35 36 theory-light engineering project management available at this time was just not rich or powerful 37 enough to help managers deal with the uncertainties created by this new generation of 38 externalities.” 39 40 He suggests that the adoption of multiple perspectives and reference to research from other disciplines 41 can greatly strengthen project management research and practice. This is supported by other project 42 management researchers. Söderlund (2018) argues that “A wider perspective will most certainly be 43 44 needed, including research from diverse disciplines following different approaches.” Hodgson and 45 Cicmil (2006) presented the case for more critical project case studies that reflect the political, social, 46 and ethical dimensions of project management work. Morris argues that this approach allows for a 47 much richer analysis, providing more depth than the traditional triple constraint of time, cost and scope. 48 49 Flyvbjerg (2014) concludes his paper by discussing the value of research into successful projects which 50 can indicate how we might replicate successful practice. He refers to projects from the previous 70 years 51 which are largely drawn from European and North American case studies. Case studies from history 52 53 have great contemporary value that can influence and inform our present understanding of project 54 management (Söderlund, 2011, and 2018). Several authors do just this; thus, for example Lenfle and 55 Loch (2018) analyse lessons from twentieth century military and space megaprojects. 56 57 58 2 59 60 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jmh Page 3 of 21 Journal of Management History 1 2 3 There are however megaprojects from a much earlier time representing greater international diversity. 4 Whilst there are limitations to the data available for such projects, analysis of historical case studies can 5 6 enrich our understanding of megaproject success and failure and empower international scholars 7 (Kozak-Holland and Procter 2014). 8 9 The constructionJournal of the Great of Pyramid Management of Giza still stands as a testament toHistory effective project 10 management. Until the building of the Lincoln Cathedral in c 1300 (Collins, 2001, P.234), the Giza 11 Pyramid was, for nearly 4000 years, the tallest building in the world, and is the only survivor of the 12 original seven-wonders-of-the-world. It is thought to have been completed in less than 20 years in 2560 13 14 BCE without basic tools (such as the wheel) that would be taken for granted today. Bowden et al (2019) 15 talk about “The Egyptian pyramids … remain a perpetual source of wonderment”. Although the authors 16 discuss this accomplishment as something cited in first year management courses, there is little or no 17 published work concerning the project management of these projects or how obstacles faced by 18 contemporary projects were addressed then. 19 20 The paper provides an analysis of the experience developed by the Egyptians in building pyramids, 21 22 showing how they developed their expertise in the management of such huge projects. This is 23 developed by a more detailed explanation of the construction of Giza. This evidence is then used to 24 explain how they could address the shortcomings of both their own previous projects and by the 25 discussion of Flyvbjerg’s 10 characteristics. Thus, an analysis of this historical project helps to illuminate 26 contemporary practice. 27 28 2) Data collection 29 30 The textual evidence concerning the construction of the Giza pyramid is somewhat unreliable, as the 31 sole early source is from a Greek traveler, Herodotus of Halicanassus, written 2000 years after the 32 project. Furthermore, the interpretation of evidence from the fabric of the pyramid structure is 33 challenging as it has suffered from earthquake, erosion, defacement, and pillage which has altered the 34 original condition. 35 36 A review was conducted of contemporary literature pertaining to both the Giza pyramid construction, 37 38 and the wide variety of different disciplines beyond Egyptology that make up the study of ancient Egypt. 39 These provide disparate and fragmentary evidence which is pieced together in the paper to reinterpret 40 the case study.