Guest Editorial
Monique Aubry, University of Quebec at Montreal
Pascal Lièvre, Clermont University and ESC Clermont Graduate School of Management
Brian Hobbs, University of Quebec at Montreal
Project Management in Extreme Environments
In June 2009, the University of Quebec at Montreal
(UQAM) hosted a 2-day research conference under the
theme of Project Management and Polar Expeditions:
What Can We Learn? It brought together researchers from
France, Quebec, and Sweden representing a diversity of
disciplines (e.g., project management, logistics, psycholo-
gy, sociology, and anthropology). The conference was held
under the umbrella of the Project Management Research
Chair of UQAM and the Research Center on Management
in Clermont-Ferrand of Clermont University and
Clermont Graduate School of Management. This research
center has been working for more than 10 years on polar
expeditions. This Project Management Journal special
issue gathers together the 8 best papers from the 15 that
were presented.
Why create such an event in the project management
research community? The growing complexity of proj-
ects and the inherent uncertainty often render tradition-
al practices and processes inefficient and ineffective.
Traditional practices are based upon complete knowl-
edge up front, while in reality, goals and methods develop
during the execution of a project in extreme environ-
ments. Polar expeditions offer good learning opportuni-
ties. First, they are in a confined environment in many
aspects: geographical, social, economical, etc. It is easier
to concentrate on the evolution of this type of project
from the very first idea up to the complete closure.
Second, risks are everywhere and not all of them can be
managed, yet consequences could be dramatic, resulting
in life or death situations. Polar expeditions are managed
within a high level of uncertainty, which is often the case
in project management in “real” life. They are prepared
with extreme rigor but must adapt continuously. Based
on these two points, we believe that polar expeditions are
ideal for research in project management representing
an opportunity to learn about managing the unexpected.
In recent years, several reflections have been initiat-
ed and attempts have been made to position the field of
project management as a legitimate object of research
per se within organization theory. A common thread
from these reflections is that there is no such thing as a
unique theory of project management, but rather multi-
ple dimensions can be identified, which are anchored in
Project Management Journal, Vol. 41, No. 3, 2–3
© 2010 by the Project Management Institute Published online in Wiley
InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20185
2 June 2010 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj
a wide variety of perspectives. Research typologies have
further been proposed to describe the current state of
the art in the field of project management. This variety
can be interpreted as part of an evolving domain not yet
stabilized but in action. But the most important quest
should be to provide an integrative model to sustain the
variety of approaches that at the same time provides a
coherent view of the entire field.
The recent conference held in Montreal took part in
this movement by proposing an approach that addresses
directly the current debate within the field of project
management and at the same time going away from its
traditional ground. Articles in this special issue have
been selected to span the overall content of the research
program. Each article presents a particular perspective,
but altogether the articles form an integrative and com-
plementary research approach to project management.
They are presented in four groups:
1. Philosophical foundations (see Bredillet). In the first
article, Bredillet addresses the ontological and episte-
mological foundations in the quest for an integrative
approach. He seizes this occasion to put together his
thoughts on the project management field considered
here as the unit of analysis. With this article, Bredillet
provides a meta-modeling approach based on
Le Moigne’s (2003) claim for “modeling to understand
that is to do ingeniously.” This approach aims at rec-
onciling paradoxes within the dynamics of project
management.
2. Theoretical perspectives and ground application in
polar expeditions (see Aubry & Lièvre; Garel & Lièvre;
Lecoutre & Lièvre; Récopé, Lièvre, & Rix-Lièvre). This
group of articles explores polar expeditions under
social network, ambidexterity, and globally, and moves
away from the more traditional theoretical approaches
on project management. In these articles, expeditions
are considered as temporary organizations answering
the characteristics of projects. The main thread of
these four articles is that they all recognize the pres-
ence of paradoxes. Garel and Lièvre present a polar
expedition by sea kayak in which both authors partici-
pated. The notion of controversies from Bruno Latour
(2005) is used to describe the project dynamics. From
this approach, it is possible to draw lessons on team
makeup, knowledge management, and the relation-
ship between preparation and actual implementation
 of a given project. Aubry and Lièvre propose a two-
dimension framework on ambidexterity to understand
paradoxes and tensions facing project leaders when
planning project activities and executing the project.
Competency on making static plans is not enough; it
requires the project leader to make a decision on
which mode to adopt in a dynamic planning process
that spans the project life cycle. Récopé, Lièvre, and
Rix-Lièvre explore resource mobilization in action.
The commitment of the participants to a project
under extreme conditions, such as a polar expedition,
has a vital bearing on its end result. But we have to
distinguish the actors’ “declared” motivations from
what actually mobilizes them in the situation: They
are not necessarily the same thing. Lecoutre and
Lièvre explore project social networks through the
Granovetter’s approach (1982, 1985) on cooperation
contrasting between identity-sense and utilitarian
mechanisms. In polar expeditions, as in the real world,
networks include nodes of newcomers considered as
forming weak ties. Cooperation, this research con-
cludes, is possible when initiated by a weak tie and
based upon one of the two mechanisms.
3. Theoretical perspectives and application in military
forces (see Godé-Sanchez; Melkonian & Picq). These
two articles analyze teamwork under extreme situa-
tions. Godé-Sanchez explores the learning mecha-
nisms at the project team level that lead to innovative
coordination mechanisms. Melkonian and Picq iden-
tify six main ingredients for collective competence
and they stress the importance of pre- and post-
mission phases.
4. Methodology (see Rix-Lièvre & Lièvre). This article
aims at defining a new methodological approach
capable of capturing the action when it unfolds. It pro-
poses an innovative approach based on practice. In
this perspective, the project really emerges while
doing it. The approach is complemented with an
embarked camera so data collected include sounds
and images in addition to the more usual written doc-
uments. The analysis includes collective storytelling
from participants and researchers.
In conclusion, polar expeditions are more than a
metaphor for project management. This integrative
approach constitutes a real world from which to learn
and eventually transfer this knowledge to other types of
organizations. As members of the organizing commit-
tee for this conference, we are pleased to share widely
the promising results of this research conference on
polar expeditions with the project management com-
munity. The goal is to encourage researchers to con-
tribute to the dynamics of project management using
daring and innovative approaches. Following Bredillet’s
call for modeling to understand, this special issue on
polar expeditions is an attempt to reassemble the indi-
vidual as a reflective actor within its paradoxical social
context. ■
Monique Aubry
Pascal Lièvre
Brian Hobbs
References
Granovetter, M. S. (1982). The strength of weak ties:
A network theory revisited. In P. V. Marsden & N. Lin
(Eds.), Social structure and network analysis (pp.
105–130). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Granovetter, M. S. (1985, November). Economic action
and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.
American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduc-
tion to actor-network-theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Le Moigne, J.-L. (2003). Le constructivisme—Tome 3
modéliser pour comprendre [Constructivism: Volume 3
modeling to understand]. Paris: Ed L’Harmattan, Coll.
Ingenium.
June 2010 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 3