Projects without Project Ecologies: Experiments in Regional Governance from the Netherlands to Bulgaria and Back Elena Boyanova Krumova Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2012 © 2012 Elena Krumova All rights reserved ABSTRACT Projects without Project Ecologies: Experiments in Regional Governance from the Netherlands to Bulgaria and Back Elena Boyanova Krumova This dissertation investigates the efforts of a temporary organization, or a project, to assemble a set of diverse stakeholders to deliberate and chart a territorial plan for the Black Sea coastal region in Bulgaria. The project lasted two years and tried to apply the integrated method of regional planning developed in the area around the port of Rotterdam. It was led by a Dutch consultant and a team of Dutch and Bulgarian environmental experts. The main question the dissertation addresses is how a temporary organization operates in an environment that provides little support for its actions. All new organizations, but temporary ones in particular, have a high risk of failure due to limited time to set roles for their members, establish trust among them, and build a common identity. Temporary organizations have been shown to rely on role structures, identities, and sources of trust outside of the organization itself. Project ecologies comprised of personal and organizational ties built around industries and geographical areas facilitate their work. Usually the existence of such ecologies is assumed in research on organizations. There are few studies addressing the question how such ecologies might come into being or how an organization that lacks the support of ecologies might try to survive. Following one such case, this dissertation details the turning points in the project's strategy as its leader consecutively attempted to play the role of facilitator, recruiter, and finally, supporter of other organizations. In the process, he abandoned the associational governance model which relies on assembling "the public" through representative organizations. Instead, connections were made and mutual support was extended to organizations on the periphery – small entrepreneurial NGOs and municipalities lacking many investment opportunities. In this sense, the project leader acted as an institutional entrepreneur trying to carve institutional space for this and other similar projects and organizations. He tried to employ coalition building tactics based on common goals and current opportunities for exchange. The project’s connection to previous similar projects even if they are in a geographically different region, as well as its efforts to link itself to ongoing and future similar projects, is what we call a projective path. It is through its temporal embeddedness in this chain of previous and future projects that a temporary organization can hope to achieve results and survive the slow and difficult process of organizing. Table of Contents Chapter 1: Organizational Form After the End of the “Society of Organizations” or How to Eat and to Talk at the Same Time ..................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: My Coast, Our Coast, Whose Coast?: Contention and Experimentation in Spatial Planning from the Netherlands to Bulgaria and Back .............................................................. 43 Chapter 3: “Just Talk”: Facilitation, Expertise, and Fragmented Organizational Fields ....... 77 Chapter 4: No Project is an Island: A Temporary Organization on a Projective Path .......... 121 Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions .................................................................................... 178 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................... 185 i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS An endeavor that requires long-term commitment, resources, and persistence cannot survive without the support of many people who have contrubuted intellectually, emotionally and financially to it. I am deeply indepted to all of them. First, I would like to thank the two Dutch consultants, Rene and Linda, for allowing me to travel with them and attend their meetings, for providing contacts in other organizations and engaging in long and spirited discussions with me. Doing research is a large part of the reason I wanted to go into academia and this first substantial project proved that this career change was worth it. I am lso indebted to all my committee members for their comments and suggestions throughout the process of analysis and writing. They supported my work and ambitions, even as I slowed down for a while to start a family. David Stark has provided guidance, inspiration, and practical advice from the beginning of my studies at Columbia University. He opened my eyes to new ways of seeing the world, pointed me to research and authors who inspired and influenced my thinking, and shared his insights and ongoing research with me. Josh Whitford guided my education in economic sociology and reminded me that there are only two kinds of dissertations – the perfect and the finished. Diane Vaughan led me into the literature on organizations and provided insightful comments. Gil Eyal has always been an inspring thinker and teacher, providing carefully written and extremely encouraging commentaries. Ann Mische opened up a new horizon in my theoretical thinking and a new path for my research. I am honored to have been working with all of these brilliant researchers and authors and I hope to continue learning from them. Other people have also been supportive and have helped shape this dissertation in ways they may not even know. Nicole Marwell helped me clarify my thinking by challenging me to make my argument in plain English, without using sociological terms. Dana Fisher introduced me ii to the literature on ecological modernization. I have also benefited from comments from all the participants in the regular CODES meetings at the Center for Organizational Innovation and in the IGERT interdisciplinary meetings in the “Development and Globalization” program. My fellow graduate students have provided invaluable encouragement, laughter, comments and questions that pushed me along the path of productivity. I have to mention in particular Dennis Bogusz, Victor Corona, Nancy Davenport, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen, Pilar Opazo, and Natacha Stevanovic, as well as visiting scholars such as Elena Bogdanova and Maja Lotz. My mom and my brother provided logistical and emotional support while I was doing research in Bulgaria. Thank you all! Finally, all of this would not have been possible without my husband Sam who encouraged me to go back to graduate school and has been my increadible and steadfast champion. iii Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my father, Boyan Krumov, one of the most inquisitive and widely- read people I have ever known. He was a patient teacher and a spirited debater who taught me to challenge myself always. iv 1 CHAPTER 1 Organizational Form After the End of the “Society of Organizations” "...we need to create ‘self-destroying organizations... lots of autonomous, semi-attached units which can be spun off, destroyed, sold... when the need for them has disappeared. ’” (Alvin Toffler, 1970, “Future Shock”, p. 122, citing Donald Schon, President of the Organization for Social and Technical Innovation) “Life is conceived as a succession of projects; and the more they differ from one another, the more valuable they are. ” (Luc Botanski and Eve Chiapello, 2005, “The New Spirit of Capitalism”, p. 110) Research Motivation I often read Bulgarian news online to keep up with life in my native country. A few lines in an article, not too long ago, caught my attention because they captured a theme that I was long interested in. The article described how one woman was dealing with her frustration with cars that were parked on sidewalks, leaving little if any space for pedestrians: she printed humorous but chiding stickers and left them on the offender’s windshield. The article’s well-known and prolific journalist applauded the effort with the following words: “ The best part about the stickers is that they are the product of a pure civic impulse, an individual effort... She does not want to start a movement, does not plan 2 on registering an association, does not call her idea a PROJECT (original emphasis) and is certainly not getting ready to apply for EU funding. ”1. Apart from the professed misgivings about any form of coordinated action in this statement, what was more interesting to me was the emphasis on projects as just such a form, different from either an association or a social movement. In Bulgaria, as in Eastern Europe overall, projects became the organizational vehicle through which institutional reform was delivered, at first by the World Bank and later, by the European Commission. Projects were used as the organizational settings where decisions were made and tools were developed to deliver both market and democratic reforms. More than simply a vehicle, however, projects became the most visible organizational feature and an indication of making progress towards market democracies. Pre-accession and structural funds fuel government-organized tenders to select among competing projects from the private and the civil sectors. Projects seem to be what everybody has to master - from public administration officials, to NGOs, to businesses.